The URL can be used to link to this page

20310 84TH PL W.PDF111111111111 8016 20310 84TH PL W September 11, 1987 STREET FILE Mr. & Mrs. Torn Belt 917 - 9th Ave. N. Edmonds, WA 98020 RE: Proposed Easement on Lot 8, Pine Ridge Estates Dear T6n & Doris: This letter -is in response to your letter dated 8-15-87. In response to paragraph one of your letter, we were not told of a watermain easement at the time we purchased our home. To our knowledge no error has been made. Enclosed YOU will find a copy of a letter from Patrick's Appraisal Service, Inc. stating that they feel there would be a negative effect on our property if there was'an easement added to our property. They indicated in a previous phone con- versation that minor mans 5-10%, however until research is done to compare other properties with similar easements, an exact figure has not been determined. At the very least 5% of our existing appraisal of $152,000 would equal $7,600. However, it is possible that aftertheir research for coaparables the percentage could increase. Since you and Rene keep harrassing us about this easement, we will agree to offer to let you buy the easement from'.'us since you are the ONLY ones that will benefit from it. we feel it ; is, f air that you should pay the value that our property will be de -valued. ' 1 - harLy think it is f air. for you to expect that since we paid you $146,000 for our property that wewould &Uaw an easement that would de -value our. property and mc*e it,;Worth less than we paid for it ($152,000 - $7,600 = $144,400). No one in their�right mind would allow such a situation to happen to them and neither will we. We will postpone our'plans to build a fence until after October.15, 1987 to allow you time to decide if you want to resolve this easement issue. If we don't hear from you by that date, we will consider this matter closed and we will begin plans for construction of our fence on the existing property line. We are tired of being hassled by you and your family as well as your tactics at trying -to turn our neighbors against us. We will offer you this opportunity to resolve this easement issue IF THAT IS YOUR DESIRE. Otherwise, we strongly advise that you leave us alone or we will contact the Edmonds Police Department and file a complaint against you. Our price for this easement is $10,000-00. I'd consider that a bargain considering the mental anguish you have caused our family. As you know, nothing is free. If you want it, you can pay for it like we did. If you don't want to pay for it, then leave us alone. The choice is up to you. sincerely, Larry & Karen Dillow 20310 - 84th Pl. W. PEdmon WA 98020 0 M M arylou Block, City of Edmonds hNMEEMOMMW PATRICK'S a ppraigal SERVICE. INC. 22002 - 64th Ave. W. Suits 2C Mountlake Terrace, Washington 98043 . Telephone: (M) 7�53M September 2, 1987 Re: File #288-25 Larry W. & Karen Dillow 203XX 84th Place West Edmonds, Washington 98020 To Whom It May Concern: PADIDEM011M Subject site consists of a pie snaped lot -comprised of approximately 10,000 square feet located at the end of a quiet cul-de-sac. Owner indicates there is a proposed 10 foot easement along north side of lot for walkway right-of-way and utilities. Proposed easement would be split between subject and parcel adjacent to north with 5 feet on each lot. It is. my opinion that tnis proposed easement could have some minor negative influence on marketability. Exact dollar amount has not been determined at this time. Should you nave any further me. James Sanders A 00 pprai er Garrly Patrick President/Appraiser questions, do not hesitate to contact le:5 G/m erl2lols STREET FIL t CITYOFEDMONDS EdN EW ADDITION RETIREMENT ASSET INFORMATION SHEET STREET FILE ASSET NO. ADDITION TO ASSET NO. DESCRIPTION SERIAL NO. LOCATION DEZ, NO. "PURCHASE ORDER NO. - PURCHASE ORDER DATE COST *PROJECT NUMBER PROJECT COMPLETION DATE COST 4�/ B.A.R.S. ACCOUNT NO. V-11 -6) C 6) - 0 C-6) ESTIMATED LIFE INITIATED BY DATE APPROVED BY "SUBMIT ASSET INFORMATION SHEET WITH FINAL PAYMENT REQUEST *SUBMIT ASSET INFORMATION SHEET UPON CLOSE OF PROJECT ACCOUNTING ONLY ,R/DEPRECIATE MONTHLY DEPRECIATION AMOUNT ANNUAL DEPRECIATION AMOUNT - G.L. ENTRY REFERENCE DATE zv--, VERIFIED BY PROCESSED BATCH NO. - tbn p INITIAL DE f".", L" 9,- 1 ��'l i "'. E -;zr 00 C) -0 CV Ln (V Of C I T Y o f EDMONDS S I DE- SEWER PERMIT Fc SEP -919% %STRM Cpl. 7a 3202 PERMIT No*.A�7368 LE WORKS E:ED :MFINI :D�7 "0 T S r4T PL Address of Construction: P4 -A-r LANT E P% I VAEM ;J Property Legal Description (Include all easements): P/ A) E R Owner and/or Builder: T, Contractor & License No: re)t1VJ-1 Singl:e Family Residence /',\/ Multi -Family (No. of Units Commercial (No. of fixture -Units Invasion into City Right -of -Way:. No X Yes (If Yes, Right -of -Way Construction Permit required. Call One -Call -Center (1-80 0-424-5555)-before any excavation.) Cross other Private Property: No NK Yes (If Yes, easement required, attach legal description and county easement number.) PLEASE READ THE ITEMS LISTED ON THE BACK I certif� that I haV� —read and'shall comply Date with the items listed on the back. Permit Fee: :?0. 42c> Trunk Charge: 2-157-00 Assessment Fee: Partial Inspection: Issued By: 116 Date Issued: 47-_S�—gr Receipt No.: 4 7- &3 Comments Date Initial Final Inspection Approved: 9--30 Date InitiA? Rejected: eason ** PERMIT MUST BE POSTED ON JOB SITE ** Wh-ite Copy - File Green Copy - Inspector ffa- t _e 7 n i —ti a 1 Buff Copy - Applicant' AaO�77 U, 0 NOTICE: Nowa rra hVro ached The information'shown on the att map(s) was compiled for use by the City Of Edmonds/ its Employees and Consultants. The City of �Edm.onds does not . wa rra nt t, accuracy of anything set for.th on t ' hese Map(�-). Any person or entity -requesting a copy should conduct an independent 'ation shown on inquiry regarding the inform -map(s), Including, but not limited to t th . e lociation of any sewer stub shown. Such sewer stubs may or may, not exist and may or may not exist at the location shown. o nor its Neither the City of Edrn 'nds empl-o-yee-s o-r offi-ce-rs -sh-@1*1 be 1--lia-b-1--e for +Lhe information given on this map(s), nor for ovided based any one representation pr upon . said map(s). The City of Edmonds Side Sewer Drawing EASEMENT NO - ---------------------------- ---------------- NEW CONSTRUCTION REPAIRS F] LID No - ------------------ ASMT. NO - ------------------ OWNER lver> ---------- ---------------------------- CONTRACTOR - -j ------ ------------------------------------- --------------- PERMIT NO - ----------------- JOB ADDRESSZ-0-��--1-0 --------- S-4--T-o ----- PLM- LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT 0 ia UT I-IflTr I-% EDMONDS - -- ----------------------------- . --' nMkTMW-PCANT .................... ------------------------------------ - ------------------------------------------ ---------------------------------------------------------- NAME OF ADDITION --- P-11-14F - ------ PWW-"1-11/75 (REV.11/78) C.C. CAP CAP ttbp. 84 -T- 14 p L . \\(\/ . F,le DATE4�30-198s----- --- ---- -- --- -------- -------------- brw IP tlrw 14',CVO% oose 5- 03 STREET FILE -3k D Z Jt4j�f 2 272.�, 8" sw rAm V PC IP WN "Ole WW715 2D4 ST sw I T-"L-T CITY OF EDMONDS- CONSTRUCTION PERMIT APPLICATION USE ZONT5._S wWREET FILE JOB ADDRESS . NA ME OR NAME OF BUSINESS) cr W Z 0 .., j Lame S.- LEGAL DESCRIPTION CHECK SUBDIVISION NO. LID NO MAILING ADDRESS 91.7 So PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY PER OFFICIAL STREET MAP. EXISTING —f49 REO-UI RED DEDICATION P RO POS E D _jV_ cc W W CITY TELEPHONE NUMBER RIGHT OF WAY CONSTRUCTION PERMIT REQUIRE D/ Lu cc STREET USE PERMIT REQUIRED 0 Z C) ADDRESS SEE ENGINEERING MEMO DATED 1-Z SEE PiW DEPT. REVIEW CHECK LIST 2EID CITY TELEPHONE NUMBER A Alrw,�- fig NAME 24 Aevx ADDRESS METER SIZE BUILDING SUPPLY SIZE FIXTURE UNITS a: W 0 L) < CC CITY TELEPHONE NUMBER Z 0 REMARKS STATE LICENSE NUMBER CITY LICENSE NUMBER SIGN AREA ENV. REVIEW AD13 NO. ALLOWED PROPOSED COMPLETE EXEMPT Legal Description of Property - include all easements (show below or attach four copies) SHORELINE# Z 2 4 0 VARIANCE OR CU PLANNING REVIEW BY DATE e3 ZW /)1 "7 ,�/d W W Z Z Z YARDS FRONT SIDE REA Ri LOT COVERAGE REMARKS CL NEW RESIDENTIAL PLUMBING ADDIALTER NON-RESIDENTIAL MECHANICAL REPAIR RETAINING WALL SIGN CHECKED BY TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION K-All, I CODE 19�ez HEIGHT 08 FILL FENCE DEMOLISH EXCAVATE F L_x_FT) 0 ;= EPRE -MOVE INSP.1 COMPLIANCE INSP. SPOW01M. Z a SPECIAL INSPECTOR REQUIRED 0 YES 0 NO AREA 07CCUPANCY GROUP OCCUPANT LOAD SIDE SEWER WATER LINE El REMARKS 0 El 9- a: NUMBER OF STORIES NUMBEROF W1 0 DWt:LLINU M 0 UNI 16 NATURE OF WORK TO BE DONE (ATTACH PLOT PLAN) VALUATION FEE PLAN CHECK FEE BUILDING PLUMBING MECHANICAL This Permit covers work to be done on private property ONLY GRADINGIFILL Any construction on the public domain (curbs, sidewalks, driveways, marquees, etc.) will require separate permission. Permit Application: 180 Days Permit Limit: I Year - Provided Work is Started Within 180 Days "Applicant, on behalf of his or her spouse, heirs, assigns and successors in interest, agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City of Edmonds, Washington, its officials, 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 nor limit in any way the City's ability to enforce any ordinance provision." TOTAL AMOUNT DUE I hereby acknowledge 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 state laws regulating construction; and in doing the work authoriz- ed thereby, no person will be employed in violation of the Labor Code of the State of Washington relating to Workmen's Compensa- THIS PERMIT AUTHORIZES ONLY THE WORK NOTED tiQn Insurance. I NSPECTION DEPARTMENT CITY OF EDMONDS 3IGN3AURE (OWNER OR AGENT) DATE LSIGNE�j APPLICATION APPROVAL This application is not a permit until signed by the Building Official or his Deputy; and fees are paid, and receipt is acknowledged in space provided. OFFICIAL'S SIGNATURE 771-3202 DATE ATTENTION I IT IS UNLAWFUL TO USE OR OCCUPY A BUILDING OR STRUCTURE UNTIL A FINAL INSPECTION HAS BEEN MADE AND APPROVAL OR ORIGINAL — File YELLOW — Inspector A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY HAS BEEN GRANTED. UBC JUL 5 CHAPTER 3. IZ5 PINK — Owner, GOLD — Assessor 102-78 Y11 Ptl�g - Eos WA . n5 9.9. E DATE : I- /,? - e5 MEMO TO: Building Division Planning Department FROM: Engineering Division Public Works Department SUBJECT: —,�9 0,4- rH ,0 3 /C) 0 After review of the subject Building Permit application, vie 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 upstream manhET�. 6. Water and sewer lines to be separated by 10 foot --minimum. �, - - - � A - - - - . -/ "!' - 7- 00 6/82 11 PPJD= ADDRESS: AjopLicATim RamipT DATE: by: Reviewed ( 1 1 dat�e COMMENTS PLANNING WTR/SWR I STREET ENGNRNG FIRE RU-ILD3NG 111111117 1111777711 snnz FAmy/muLTIPLE/cmerciAt.- (circle one) SETBACKS CHECKED - Plaming 11171111 11111171111 VAMMIM/SEMACK AW. I CONDITIMAL, USE PER�1IT 2 77717— 111711111 T1777TI-7777TFII-17 - ADB REQUIREMM CHECKED ///////// //////// 3 OTHER ZONING M=REMENTS 77T17T — 77777T 7177TRT TT17177177 4 ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES IIIITT177 11711117 ACCESS SLOPE & VEHICLE ACCESS 6 f /77777T/7777T/7 117171111 11171711 DRAINAGE PLAN (On Site), 7 777TM11 STREET FILE 8 14- LEGAL DESCRIPTICIN VERIFICATION p 1179-177= -ITI= 9 7777MR1111111 QUIT CIAIM/DEDICATIONS �:alk ////// ///////// 10 777777777 TITITIT7 EASEMENT - PUBTIC/PRTVATE -;�� ///////// //////// 11 CALCULATE SEWER CONNECTION IF NO LID# zk 7T/717TR7///// 12 - T 77T/T777 PIAT/SUBDIVISION =IREMENTS M,4,4* //////// 1 13 f T=77MI111 RIGHT-OF-WAY CIONSTRUCTICIN PERMIT REM ////// ///////// 1 14 77T977TF77777777777777# M11171 BOND MOD FOR PUBLIC IMPROMIMM d ////// ///////// ///////// //////// I SOILS CONDITIONS & GROUND 77T17TTTf777T1T 77777777 WATER FIELD CHECKED ////// ///////// //////// 16 77777 1111117 7 STREET PAVING REQUIRED 17 IIITTITff -IT11-MIll 77777�7 CURB AND GUTTER REQUIRED 18 SIDEWALK REQUIRED 111171111 ///////// 19 717777777 717777777, CURB CUr FOR DRIVEWAY REM ///////// ///////// 20 STREET NAME SIGN REQD / 7 / 7 / 7 777 ///////// 77777 ///////// 11141, _ �- 7TM11111 — 21 --7///// OTHER SIGNING REQD ////// 777777777 ///////// 111111117 ///////// 1111117111 — 22. SIDE SEWER AVAILABILITY 117111 1111117T777-77771 ///////// ///////// 23 MaSTM WATER MAIN SIZE 77777777 ///////// 9 "' p /. 1177711111 24 VATER MEMM SIZE //////W ///////// .3/4/" 11111771 //////// 7771—ITTTP — 25 SERVICE LINE SIZE 77 ///////// 7 - , :5111 777TIT17 //////// 7TI77= — 26 HYDRANT REQUIRED //////A/7177Tff,//177777 27 11111117 1 M/////// HYDRANT SIZE EXISTING //////// 28 CROSS 0ONNE)CTION INSPECTION R= 77W //////// //////// — 29 WATER METER CHARGE MOD 77777777 //////// 7777777R7 7 30 LINE CHARGE REM - SPRINKLER 77TT= 1117FR7 //////// 1111111777 31 STREET CUT 32� TM11 OPEN DrrCH EXISTING ////// 33 34 CULVERT RE QD 35 SIZE f=777= ////// ///////// I , 36 CATCH BASIN REQ1D 111W7T1T17Tff ////// ///////// - 37 11NDICATED ON SITE PLAN TITTITV17WI //m/m,- 38 SHOULDER DRAINAGE MAINMIN TM// SHALE OPEN RUNOFF 39 MISC: 40 REVIEWED BY: PLANNING MaR., ENGINEERING MGR. PUBLIC WORKS M(M! /'4--Z 7' A-�xoe,5 MUL 5 Ina- ti - 11 City of -Edmonds RIGHT-OF-WAY CONSTRUCTION PERMIT Permit Number- Lsue Date: e�7 JUN 2 4 1996 41 tlyulf4t",%(Nicinity of Construction: 20310 84th Pl W GTE to place, operate, and maintain a buried service 9 0 C� B. Type of Work (be specific): wi re f r"" ex'14831 pedestal #A480 located at 20 10tw 84th P1 W then west to the residence at 20 0 84th PI W. GTE to pbbw 85 feet, push one driveway, and piogth nn rnnrj� P Q Iq 4R fp-^f- Mary A Bower, Permit Coord. C. Contractor: CTF Northwest Incorporated Contact: Qannis AlAxAndpr 771-qO36 or mohile 388-1355 Mailing Address: 2312C W Casino Rd Phone: OR 710-4130 Eyepett, A 98294-1490 Mery 29GA88-1628 State License #: Liability Insurance: Bond: $ D. Building Permit # (if applicable): Side Sewer Permit # (if applicable): E. [-] Commercial EJ Subdivision El City Project, )0 Utility (PUD, WNG, CABLE, WATER) EJ Multi -Family E] Single Family El Other 2100-9POOlDB 242310 INSPECTOR: 114SPECTOR: F. Pavement or Concrete Cut 0 Yes r[I]No-) G. Size of Cut: x H. Chargq�,$ Please see attackea-i4ettli. APPLICANT TO READ AND SIqN INDEMNITY: Applicant understands and by his signature to this application, agrees to hold the City of Edmonds harmless from 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 legalproceedings including defense costs, and attorney fees by reason of granting thispermit. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR WORKMANSHIP AND MATERIALS FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR FOLLOWING THE FINAL INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE WORK ESTIMATED RESTORATION FEES WILL BE HELD UNTIL THE FINAL STREET PATCH IS COMPLETEO BY CITY FORCES, AT WHICH TIMEA DEBIT OR CREDIT WILL BE PROCESSED FOR ISSUANCE TO THE APPLICANT. Construction drawing of proposed work required with permit application. A 24 hour notice is required for inspection; Please call the Engineering Division, 771-0220. Work and material is to be inspected during progress and at completion. Restoration is to be in accordance with City Codes. Street shall be kept clean at all times. Traffic Control and Public Safety shall be in accordance with City regulations as required by the City Engineer. All street cut ditches shall be patched with asphalt or City approved material prior to the end of the workingday; NO EXCEPTIONS. Ihave read the above statementsAudu&,derstand thepermit requirements and thepink copy of thepermit will be available on site at al es Purposes. Signature: Inhn H- 1ZtPmixrJ- Date: June 17, 1996 (Contractor or Agent) Oprns Supv-OSP Engrg. CA LL DIAL -A -DIG PRIOR TO BEGINNING WORK FOR CITY USE ONLY. APPROVEDBY: RIGHT OF WAY DEPOSIT TIME AUTHORIZED: VOID, AFTER Y�' DAYS DISRUPTION FEE/FUND 111; SPECIAL CONDITIONS: 0 �ALP C-UTS RESTORATION FEE: A-Luvi(rQ -1kis 60-niE PERMIT FEE': TOTAL,FEE: COMMENTS: . - RECEIPTFEE: DATE: ISSUED BY: �1 NO WORK SHALL BEGIN PRIOR TO PERMIT ISSUANCE Eng. Div. 1994 FIELD INSPECTION NOTES Comments: Diagram.: (Fund 111 - Route copy to Street Dept.) CONTRACTOR CALLED FOR INSPECTION El YES Partial Work Inspection by P.W.: Work Disapproved By: Date: FINAL APPROVAL BY: Date: El NO I' PERMIT SUBMITTED BY GTE - LEGEND PMS a POLES 0 ROAD BORES OVERHEAD LINES I.D.UTILITY POTHOLE UG TRENCHNG ---UGT— WATEP- tAAO" Zy- ba R.O.w. % ol ---------------- ----------- 10 * ----------------------------- EOP -2102- S7- �S lil ------------------------- ro i� CD ---------- ---------------------------------- z p THE FOLLOWING INFO TO BE PROVIOED Ln I. - RIGHT OF WAY LINES.EOP OR FACE OF CURB, EXISTING SIDEWALK. POLES, ROAO CUTS AND THE UTILITY UNDER ROAD CUT' ABOVE GROUND FACILITIES.(Te:) PEDS,BOXES.CABINETS. ETC..UNDERCROUND TRENCHING AND OVERHEAD LINES. 0 FOOTAGE OF WORK IN R.O.W. IIIIIIIIIIIIII 15418 20310 84TH PL W CITY OF EDMONDS 505 BELL STREET - EDMONDS, WA 98020 - (206) 771-0247 - FAX (206) 771-0252 OFFICE OF THE MAYOR .6's �- . 189" July 16, 1996 Karen Dillow 20310 84th Pl. W. Edmonds, WA 98026 Dear Ms. Dillow: BARBARA FAHEY MAYOR Let me start by apologizing for the delay in responding to your letter of February 26. 1 am sure you have been wondering why you had not received any reply. The fact is that this matter was so old no one I spoke with had any reliable memory of this situation. In addition, the records pertaining to it had been archived since it was considered a case closed. With the help of the City Attorney, I was eventually able to access a complete file and have had an opportunity to fully review it. I was hoping there might be a way to resolve this situation in a favorable manner for you. Unfortunately, this is not the case. I simply do not have the authority to approve your request. Public funds cannot be spent to provide direct benefit to individuals. Expenditures must be deemed in the best interests of all citizens. Cities are closely scrutinized through an auditing process, and this type of expenditure simply is not allowed. I have no idea why Mayor Naughten took the action he did, but it is too bad you did not act at that time. While I can find no justification for the offer to settle, since he made it, it would have been to your benefit to accept it. I simply can find no basis to justify the claim. Though I can find no. specific documentation in the matter, I believe Mayor Hall came to the same conclusion which resulted in the original offer being withdrawn after she took office. The area where you now live was subdivided by a developer before you purchased your property. The City did require an easement to allow a pathway to the park. In the original proposal, it was one lot removed from your lot; however, it was relocated due to the topography. This change was approved before the plots were recorded. Your title should have clearly indicated this. If it did not, your issue should have been with the developer, not the City since it is the developers responsibility to record all restrictions on the property as a part of the title information. - This is a private property matter and should have been resolved at the time you discovered the problem. The City took appropriate action when it required -the access be created by the developer in order 0 Incorporated August 11, 1890 0 Si- ster Cities International — Hekinan. Jar)an Letter to Karen Dillow July 16, 1996 Page 2 to create the development. Any actions to mitigate the effect of the requirement should have been negotiated with the developer at the time of purchase. It is unfortunate you have spent so much time trying to get resolution from the City when it was really the developer who was obligated to respond to your concerns. Since this area was developed back in 1979, 1 am sure you no longer have any legal recourse. From my perspective, while I understand your frustration, I have no ability to offer any assistance to you to create the fence you desire. Reviewing the whole history of the case certainly reveals reasons why you have every right to be upset with the way this situation was handled. Regrettably, that is not an acceptable justification for allocating an expenditure of public funds. I know this is not the answer you had hoped for, but I can give you no other. Sincerely, Barbara Fahey Mayor BF/dm MI c: City Attorney Scott Snyder Planning Manager Rob Chave WmWord6\Attorney\DillowFc E February 26, 1996 Honorable Mayor Fahey City of Edmonds 250 - 5th Ave. N. Edmonds, WA 98020 Dear Mayor Fahey: RE:CEI'VeD FEB 2 6 1996 OFFICE OF THE MAyOR Congratulations on your successful election!! I voted for you because of your honesty and integrity; something the other candidate lacked. I respectfully request your assistance in clearing up a very old city matter that should have been taken care of, and was almost resolved when Laura Hall took over as mayor and therefore decided not to honor Larry Naughten's offer to resolve this matter. All we are asking is that the resolve to this matter, as proposed by Larry Naughten, be honored. I am enclosing all the pertinent documents regarding this matter and hope that you will be able to assist us in resolving this matter once and for all. Thank you for your time. Sincerely, Karen Dillow 20310 - 84th Pl. W. Edmonds, WA 98026 Enclosures 0 0 CITY OF EDMONDS LARRY S� NAUGHTEN CIVIC CENTER - EDMONDS. WA 98020 # (206) 775-2525 kody')n - 890 - 19 4 March 22,' 1990 Karen Dillow 20310 84th Place West Edmonds, WA 98020 Dear Karen: After reviewing the whole issue, the most the City can do is a four foot fence, parallel to your neighbor's fence. Whether you go four feet or six feet, you'll need a permit; also a survey if you don't know your lot line. I'll explain the reason we can't do more when I see you. You should probably get a bid, maybe two. We'll also put in some surface material; probably crushed rock. We won't put in bollards unless it becomes a problem with motorcycles later on. Sincerely, CITY OF EDWONDS a r-f y/&7-4PSu9h t e n LSN/db 0 Incorporoted August 11, 1890 * E 0 April 4, 1994 Mayor Laura Hall City of Edmonds 250 - 5th Ave. N. Edmonds, WA 98026 Dear Mayor Hall: HAND DELIVERED This letter is in regards to our fence/easement problem that I spoke to you about in the fall of 1993� We are anxious to resolve this situation and execute the enclosed agreement but are now being told by Jeff Wilson of the plaimmig department that the agreement is no longer valid. This is particularly distressing because nothing is any different except for the fact that when the agreement was drafted Larry Naughten was the Mayor instead of yourself If you will recall I even called you at home several years before I ever spoke with Larry Naughten and talked with you about this easement situation because at the time the plat approval was made, you were on the Planing Commission and City Council. Your response to me was "Larry Naughten is the Mayor and he can do anything he wants to do." I took your advice and called Larry Naughten and involved him in a resolution of this situation, which ended up being the document that Scott Snyder drafted saying the City of Edmonds would pay for the fence along the easement. The reason we did not immediately sign the agreement is that we had some concerns regarding the hold harmless clause and we felt uncomfortable with assuming liability since the City had authorized a reduction in the easement walkway from the approved ten feet to five feet, making a very narrow path for children to navigate their bicycles. Having two children of my own, I did not want to create a safety hazard and therefore we have had a hard time visualizing a 125 foot tunnel, five feet wide with fences on both sides, as being a safe arena for children. I have had numerous discussions with Jeff Wilson regarding the safL-ty issues, and he is not at all concerned about the potential for children getting hurt. We are in desperate need to fence our property to keep people using the easement from walking on our grass, ruining our plants and breaking more sprinkler heads. Our sprinkler system has been unusable for three years because bicycles have broken off the sprinkler heads and cracked the water lines and the entire system needs to be dug up and replaced at a cost of over $1,000. Obviously until we construct a fence, we areal going to fix the sprinkler system because it will just get broken again. I am confident that you can resolve this situation for us. You are the power in Edmonds and I have alot of respect for the job you do for the citizens of Edmonds. We would like to get this matter resolved quickly so we can get a fence constructed. Your prompt response would really be appreciated. Thank you 'in advance for your assistance. Sincerely, Larry & Karen Dillow 20310 - 84th Pl. W. Edmonds, WA 98026 April 4, 1994 Jeff Wilson City of Edmonds 250 - 5th Ave. N. Edmonds, WA 98026 Dear Jeff - This letter will serve as an official request to execute the enclosed agreement that was drafted by Scott Snyder as a resolution to our easement/fence problem. We would like to get this situation resolved in a timely fashion. Please do not hesitate to contact me at 778-1925 if you need additional information. Sincerely, Larry & Karen Dillow 20310 - 84th Pl. W. Edmonds, WA 98026 Enclosures 0 0 CITY OF EDMONDS 250 - 5TH AVE. N. - EDMONDS, WA 98020 - (2061771-0220 - FAX (2061771-0221 COMMUNITY SERViCES DEPARTMENT Public Works * Planning * Parks and Recreation e Engineering 0 - 194 May 6, 1993 Larry and Karen Dillow 20301 84th Place West Edmonds, WA 98026 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Dillow: LAURA M. HALL MAY044 Subject: PINE RIDGE ESTATES PEDESTRIAN EASEMENT AND FENCE SETTLEMENT Thank you for your patience in allowing me to review the material which you provided regarding the location of the pedestrian easement across your neighbors property, and your concern with the placement of a fence along the easement next to your property. As a follow- up to our conversation earlier this week regarding your concerns and issues, I am taking this opportunity to provide you with written confirmation on the conclusions which I have reached. From a review of the records which you have provided and the records contained in the plat file, it is very clear that a condition was imposed on the plat to provide a pedestrian easement through the southern end of the plat, as a means to Provide pedestrian access to Pine Ridge Park. However, what is not entirely clear is how the easement ended up in its location. While I understand the concerns you have with the location of the easement, the easement has been in place since the approval of the plat, and it has been providing the function which it was intended to provide. With respect to your draft settlement with the City for the installation of a fence along your property line adjacent to the easement, the City Attorney has advised me that the proper course of action for you to pursue approval of the City, is to submit a request to the City Council. The "fence settlement" issue which has been under discussion since approximately 1990, requires formal approval by the City, and Council authorization to expend the funds approved in the agreement. The best course of action to pursue final approval of the settlement and authorization of funds, would be for you to address a request to the Mayor. I appreciate the effort you put forth in helping me to understand to a greater degree the history of this issue. However, while there may appear to be some points of uncertainty as to how certain events and decisions were reached pertaining to the easement location, I believe that the end product serves the intent of the plat condition. * incorporated August 11, 1890 0 0 The issue- of the fence settlement, which you have been pursuing for approximately 3 years could potentially be resolved with a request to the Council for appropriation of funds to construct the fence, however, I can not guarantee that this will occur. If the Council does approve the "fence settlement", it is my -belief that the majority of your concerns with the pedestrian easement should be resolved. If you should have any further question' s, please do not hesitate to contact me at 771-0223. Sincerely, Community Services Department - Planning Division Jeffrey S. Wilson, AICP Current Planning Supervisor PC: File No. P-6-79 Dillow Fence Settlement File Mayor Hall Scott Snyder, City Attorney Rob Chave, Planning Manager DfLFENCVS-6-93.CORRF-S4ZT'rERS 0 0 March 24, 1993 Jeff Wilson Planning Department City of Edmonds 250 - 5th Ave. N. Edmonds� WA 99026 Dear Jeff - Pursuant to our phone conversation today, I am enclosing supporting documentation regarding the casement between lot 8 and lot 9 of Pine Ridge Estates. Copy of Staff Review of Proposed Subdivision for P-6-79 sta6ng required improvements and dedications: (2) walks or pedestrians ways required between lot 10 & 11. Also states 8' easement for path to park between lots 10 & 11. 2. Copy of Attachment to Page 2 of Plamer's Review Form for P-6-79. Item #3(a) lists Dedicate an 9' easement between lots 10 & I I for path to park. Strength: Will provide pedestrian access to the northwest portion of Pine Ridge Park- 3. Copy of Recommended Motion for P-6-79. Item #3 lists that an 8' wide pedestrian easement be established between Lots 10 & I I (crossed out to show 9 & 10) be surfaced and outfitted with a lockable wood bollard. Item #4 lists that the sidewalk extend to and connect with the 8' easement between lots 10 & I I (crossed out to show 9 & 10). 4. Copy of Page 3 of Recommended Motion states that P-6-79 be approved with the following conditions: (1) The granting of an 8' easement between lots 10 & I I for a pedestrian path to Pine Ridge Park. Recommended that approval be made for the following reasons.- (4) It will provide a pedestrian access to Pine Ridge Park. 5. Copy of memo dated 6127ng from Jim Jessei to Mary Lou Block. See highlighted references to develop a finished pedestrian access to the park. This easement should be 8 feet wide to allow emergency vehicle access to the park and should have a wooden bollard blocking off undesired vehicle access. This new walkway would be a valuable addition to our Pine Ridge Park pedestrian circulation plan. 6. Copy of the Edmonds Planning Commission minutes dated June 27, 1979. P-6-79 was listed under the Agenda heading. Further numites. state: An 8' access easement between lots 10 and I I will be required to lead to Pine Ridge Park and a side yard setback will be required from that easement. Ms. Block recommended approval with the following conditions: Item #3 states that an 8' wide pedestrian easement be established between lots 10 and 11, to be surfaced and outfitted with a lockable wood bollard. Item #4 states that the sidewalk emend to an connect with the 8' easement between lots 10 and 11. Item #5 states that a pedestriart walkway be constructed along the west side of Uth Ave. W. from the improved portion of the road south to Pine Ridge Park. Page 2 - Jerry Swanson said the walkway between Lots 10 and I I should be shifted to the end of the cul-de-sac where it exits to the park property. Ms. Block responded that the City would have no objection to relocating it between lots 9 and 10 and the applicant also was agreeable to that. NU. Schillberg said he was satisfied. Page 3 - Commissioner Smith agreed that the walkway would be better located between lots 9 and 10 than between 10 and 11. Commissioner Smith then moved� seconded by Commissioner Ross, that P-6-79 be approved with the conditions and for the reasons given by Ms. Block in her presentation, with the exception that the 8' walkway casement will be between lots 9 and 10, rather than between lots 10 and 11. Motion carried. 0 0 Letter to Jeff Wilson March 24, 1993 7. Copy of Pags 3-5 of the Edmonds City Council Minutes dated August 21, 1979. Preliminary Approval of Pine Ridge Estates, P-6-79. Page 4, item #3 that an 8' wide pedestrian easement be established between lots 9 and 10, to be surfaced and outfitted with a lockable wood bollard; (4) that the sidewalk extend to and connect with the 8' Casement between lots 9 and lo. (5) that a pedestrian walkway be constructed along the west side of 84th Avc. W. from the improved portion of the road south to Pine Ridge Park. 8. COPY of Memo from Mary Lou Block to Halve Harrison dated Deocmber 10, 1981 stating the subdivision was given preliminary approval by the City Council on August 21, 1979 and that the applicant has complied with all the required conditions and asking for final approvall of this plat. 9. Copy of Edmonds City Council Minutes dated December 15, 198 i under Consent Agenda. Item #J Approval of final 17-lot plate of Pine Ridge'Esta(es. 10. Copy of the subdivision plat drawing showing the 8' walkway easement located between lots 9 and 10 as required. 11. Copy ota drawing Doris Belt drew for us before our house was even built, The draw. Ling is in her handwriting and does not show any easement with respect to the location of our house, howcvce'r, it does show boundary lim. I include this drawing to substantiate the fact that we were not told about the easement prior, to the purchase of our home. 12. Copy of our initial title report we received with regard to the purchase of out home on December 11, 1985. As you will note, the only information regarding any easement is listed on Exhibit B. #3 where - it references an easement granted to Public Utility District #I of Snohomish County ' General Telephone Company of the Northwest, Inc., and CATV with regard to underground utilities'. No when does it mention any walkway or water easement on lot #8. 13. Copy of a letter dated June 24, 1987 from our apprai ' ser stating that the proposed easement 10 our property would have a negative influence on marketability which is one reason why we opposed the easement being located on our property. 14. After harrassment and coercion from Tom & Dons Belt, Diana & Rene VanLouvren, we reluctantly agreed to the proposed walkway easement. A copy of that proposed easement as signed by us and notafized is enclosed. As you wil-I notice. there was no mention of a watermain or . uti1ity easement in the easement document, 15. A copy of the easement document after the VanLouvren's returned it to Mary Lou Block and she added her additional requirements regarding the utility easement. You can compare the handwriting and venfy that the additional wording was added by Mary Lou Block. This document was then returned to us for mitialing of the additional utility casement wording which we strenously objected. As we have since discovered thanks to Noel Miller, there was no reason to include any wording regarding the utility easement bemuse the watermain is not located on our property, which was an incorrect assurnption made by Mary Lou Block. 16. A copy of a letter dated 8/15/87 from Tom Belt asking for the ret u*m of the easement documents after the addition of the utility easement wording. 17. Copy of a letter dated 9/11/87 from us to Tom and Doris Belt responding to their 8/15187 letter. 18. Copy of a letter dated 1/19/88 to Mary Lou Block from us regarding the easement issue. 19. Copy of a letter dated 2/11/88 from Mary Lou Block in response to our 1/19/88 letter, Letter to Jeff Wilson March 24, 1993 20. Copy of a letter dated 12/21/89 fro mi Mayor Naughten after he reviewed the easement situation. Unfortunately, it was not known at that time that the watermain was not located on our property, therefore the req uiremcnt of the uttlity casement should not havc been required. 21. Copy of a letter dated 3/22/90 from Mayor Naughten with the fence resolution. 22. Copy of a letter dated 5/22/91 to Mayor Naughten from us with two fence bids. After receiving the agreement from Scott Snyder for the City to pay to construct a fence, another attempt to get to the bottom of this easement situation was made when we contacted Noel Miller. ft was always assumed by Mary Lou Block that the watermain was located on our property (lot 8), therefore the request for 5 feet the 10 foot casement was to be located on lot 8. However, no one ever investigated to t c watermain was indeed located on lot 8. Mary Lou Block only assumed from info tion she from Tom & Doris Belt, that the watermain was indeed located on lot 8. After Miller came and investigated, it was discovered that the watermain is not located on -lot 8 but all n lot 9. So after I these years the City was trying to get us to grant a utility easement on our property for no reason. It i very disturbing to us this entire easement hassle with our neighbors which has z o tion he -r ev 1 . Ilcr e d n I t 9. S�je 'r I the t i very h2l resulted in our nci us, 31 ;hbors hating wouldn' have happened if the City had done their homework and f 10 n,3 ZT ound out before rel ----neighbo (the VanLouvren's, daughter of Tom & Doris Belt) obtain an easement. Vom t s w n there was no nebq to request one in the firs, p 1��, We could have avoided all f F d Jje last of this e and a onal distress that hasxone on over t a years not to mention the time v ber I ol all ca Mary Lou NI-ock behei i41�e infopriation sh received from Tom & Doris Belt o f r f r it thr93(gh the proper City dcoW*wnts ti e sure that the information she was Wha:� the =if haviri'�& �thePlanrnuing �*�ssio d City Council's approval of developments if jen t he] the Ci lt� i the/ ui ig t be he] _the Ci It is clear that the City was negligent in several X — -P r to locate a required easement in a location that was not i �Ifty �Iow by the ounci Ciity ity --�Tu Bloc tanning Departme-nt Manager, to put pressure on a i tty iiie all 2 ied M ;e goo i Zf i s-,!,.-ue a ent to the City witho good cause. Mary Lou Block failed to research where w was be b requesting such case. exit. In su)i�nary, we ve it tear from enclosed documents that it was recommended and approved by I lear ro f in enc'o die 8� the: City ik that the 8� ay ment be located between lots 9 & 10, never between lots 8 & 9 as e 1%tir so w U mc� it curre n y Someo , somew put that easement in the wrong place and the City never followed up to make sure that th ts r development of the subdivision were being complied with. The of th y --j purpose and int the w a ent which was a requirement of the approval of the development n lu f have n r bee ed - t of providin estrian access to Pine Ridge Park. We. hereby request that correct 0 the City' of onds correct flus problem and abate the walkway easement that is currently located betwee� lots 8 & 9. Sincerely, Larry and Karen Dillow 20310 - 84th Pl. W. Edmonds, WA 99026 Enclosures Date: February 23, 1995 To: Mayor Laura M. Hall From: Noel Miller, Public Wcosu=dent Subject: TREES IN CITY RIGHT-OF-WAY NEAR PINE RIDGE PARK 204TH STREET S.W. AND 85TH PLACE WEST As you are aware, the City received a claim for damages regarding a Hemlock tree which fell during the January 20, 1993 windstorm on a privately owned truck canopy. The tree was located in a 30 foot wide public fight -of -way and fell onto the Dillow property at 20310 84th Pl. W. located to the north of the right-of-way. After the windstorm, I had Pat Harris look at the tree to see if there was anything noticeable that would indicate the tree was likely to fall (see attached report). However, because of this and several other trees falling in the vicinity, Mrs. Dillow remained concerned that something was wrong with the trees ia-her in the public right-of-way and adjacent property. Because the City could potentially be held liable for damages over this issue, I proceeded on behalf of the City in hiring Dan Douglas, -an experienced arborist, to examine the site in January 1995. He examined the uprooted. stump of the Hemlock tree which still remains on the site along with other trees in the night -of -way. He has determined that a serious disease, commonly called laminated root rot, exists in the 30 foot wide night -of -way and possibly on adjoining properties. Arvilla Ohlde, Parks and Recreation Manager, has been informed and she is proceeding to have Jim Barbarinos, the City consulting arborist for Pine Ridge Park, assess if there are signs of this disease in Pine Ridge Park. As of this date, this information has not been shared with Mrs. Dillow. Now that the City has found out that there are diseased trees and that a disease organism exists in the area, the City has a responsibility to correct the problem on the right-of-way. Otherwise, the City wfll be responsible for damages if any additional trees fall in this area according to Art Housler and the WCIA claims representative. As I see it, the City has the following options: Option 1. Cut down the trees in the right-of-way that presently show signs of the disease. I estimate that there are six to eight trees in this situation. The remaining trees, perhaps sixteen to twenty in number, would need to have extensive assessment monitoring performed to guarantee that they currently do not have the disease and that exposure from cutting some of the trees would not increase the likelihood of them Lalling from windstorms. Mr. Douglas estimated that it would cost $150 to $200 per tree to monitor them due to the extensive time involved to expose the' major tree roots and look for the laminated root rot. Tile neighbors would be City of Edmonds (za Public Works notified prior to cutting. Total cost of this option is $4,000: $3,000 for testing and $ 1,000 for cutting. Option 2. Clear the entire 30 foot right-of-way of all major evergreen trees (Douglas Fir and' Hemlock). The neighbors would be notified prior to cutting and deciduous trees would be replanted which are much more resistant to this* disease. Total cost of this option is $4,000: $2,000 for cutting and $2000 for replanting 25 trees. As Mr. Douglas explained to me, laminated root rot is similar to a cancerous disease; as longas there are susceptible living organisms present, i.e. Hemlock and Fir trees, the disease stays alive. There are basically two ways to eliminate the disease; either sterilize the soil thereby killing all living plants in the vicinity or remove all of the susceptible trees in the area that are infected. Obviously, removing the evergreen trees is the only practical choice in this situation. I am sure that the adjoining neighbors will be upset over the removal of twenty to twenty-five trees. However, they will also be given the sobering advise that there may be diseased trees on their properties as well and they could be held liable if those trees are the cause of damage to someone else's property. From a cost-effective and risk management perspective, I would recommend that the City undertake Option #2. This would cost $4,000, but would eliminate the disease from City right -of- way - I therefore request your opinion on this matter and your recommendation within the next week if at all possible. Time is of the essence to reduce the City's liability in this situation. nank you. NM/cc cc: Paul Mar Art Housler files�pubvwrksVrees 17 CD '50 D. V�,Wo S T so W', V R 'SIDE V, 3: Ol OD rw 60' 4 it 203RD. PL. Z�-. Ila. 5 w CS, - 7 .80 a. 0 HE GHTS- E S 8 7 6 NOT OPEN .30 ;4 400204TH- ST- SW 33 60 24 60 2 34 16 25 3 35 17 26 B C 4 . -,: Ld 36,- 3 18 27 PINE RIDGE PARK 5 CL Lii B 6 19. A 36 xn In Q- If 20 29 0 -7 U 39 W 1 3 21 30 40- (0 22 31 9 (30 23 32 to Zo207 ST SW 0 13 ra -47- - 6 4-5 44 ID 14 12 GO 4 3 ST. 0 40 1 -1 1. 0 R 0. 2 7CC 0 0 RECEIVED M E M 0 R A N 0 U M w3i im & I HOUSLER March 24, 1993 MAR 3 1199 3 TO: Art Housler Administrative Services, Director FROM: Noel Miller ic W®rks Superintendent Vof � b�l SUBJECT: CLAIMS FOR DAMAGE LARRY DILLOW - 20310 - 84th Pl. W. This claim concerns a downed hemlock tree located in a 30 feet wide city right-of-way adjacent to Pine Ridge Park. The street crews were called out the day after the storm to remove the tree which had uprooted and fallen on the Dillow property. I had Pat Harris examine the tree and he indicate it was generally in good health. The tree was part of a larger cluster of trees and was not in an exposed situation. In our opinion, there is no practical way to predict that trees in this area are more.likely to fall during a severe windstorm than other trees in the Pine Ridge Park vicinity. NM/l k cc: Pat Harris Bill Stroud A-Y, DILLOW/TXTLMK41 0 0 Tree Inspection Report Date: 1/23/95 Prepared by: Cricklewood Horticultural & Arboricultural Services 11907 Nevers Road Snohomish, WA 98290 Requested by: Noel F. Miller, PE & Art Housler City of Edmonds Community Services Department 200 Dayton Street Edmonds, WA 98020 Request: Examine trees along right-of-way trail to Pine Ridge Park with regards to health and future failure/stability. Findings: There is a significant infection of Phel'linus weirii, laminated root rot, in this area. It has been here for several years. At least three large trees have failed, and there are several dead standing trees which will fail in the near future. Several other hazard trees, not infected by this disease, Also exist in the area, although not all are located on city property or right-of-way. In -addition to the laminated root rot, another root rot disease, Armillaria, or shoestring fungus, was also found. There is evidence that at least one more organism is present. Many trees show stress signs; declining canopies, missing and deformed tops, poor color, and - invasion by insects, which are an indication of infection of root rot organisms. This type of infection is a common occurrence in a second growth stand of trees. Recommendation: My recommendations are based on my site inspection and discussions with Jim Barbarinos, who did work in Pine Ridge Park a few years ago. Because the two primary diseases will continue to spread throughout this stand, and there are significant targets (houses and people to name a few) in the area, I believe most, if not all, trees should be removed. The problem with not removing all of the trees in this narrow strip at one time is three fold. One is that other trees will have to be removed in the future due to continued spread of the diseases.. There is no practical way to stop this event. Current recommendations call for trenching, which does not seen practical -on a public right-of-way. The second reason is that the cost wiff be greater to remove trees over a longer period of time, due to ongoing inspections and increased prep and clean-up times. The third reason is that removal of only part of the trees will additionally expose the remainder of the trees* to more wind, leading to a higher failure potential. One possible benefit of removal of all of the trees at one time is that you will likely reduce your costs, or even make a few dollars by selling the timber. I do not suggest logging lightly, but the liability issues and safety of the public are paramount. Also a restoration plan should be part of such a project. Finally, you should be aware that it is highly likely that this significant infection extends into the park and private property. Based on my site observations and discussions with Jim Barbarinos, it is likely that there are hazardous trees in the park area, and on private land along the perimeter of the right-of-way. Adjoining landowners should be advised of this situation. DanDouglas Consulting Arborist 0 0 DANDOUGLAS 11907 NEVERS RD. SNOHOMISH, WA 98290 EDUCATION 1964-1966 Everett Community College, Everett, WA. 1966-1969 Washington State University, Pullman, WA. B.S. in Ornamental Horticulture. 1976-1983 Edmonds Community College,- �ynnwood,WA. Course work in Horticulture, Instructional Education and Computer Programing. Training Workshops and Seminars - I have received significant training in the following areas: Arboriculture, Horticulture, Pruning, Personnel Supervis ion, Pesticide Application, Horticultural Law, and Plant Growth and Physiology. 1993 - Present Certifed Arborist, International Society of Arboriculture EMPLOYMENT 1975 to present - Cricklewood, Horticultural and Arboricultural Services; Snohomish, Washington. Present activities: Arboriculture contracts; ornamental pruning; arboriculture and horticulture consultation, including insect and diseasediagnosis; expert witness activities; personnel training; landscape, street tree, and hazard tree evaluations; street tree inventories; and tree construction impact and tree retention evaluations. 1977 to 1985 - Edmonds Community College, Lynnwood, Washington. Horticulture Instructor/Supervision of grounds: Major curriculum areas ' -- Landscape Maintenance, Landscape Construction, Pruning, Advanced Pruning and Tree Climbing, Pesticide Application, Sprinkler Irrigation, and Horticulture Machinery. Program Development includes Arboriculture Program, major revision of Landscape Maintenance and Construction options, Firland Extension 0 0 Programs and Horticulture Therapy Program. Major projects include lake and jogging trail design, and construction coordination, Christmas Workshops, a Horticulture Therapy Symposi ' um and research and curriculum development for a two year degree program. Grounds duties include development and coordination of all Grounds Programs, budget development and implementation, project development, employee supervision. 40-50 hrs./wk. 1976 to 1977 - Washington State Reformatory, Monroe, Washington. Gardener III: Supervision and training of grounds crew, numbering from six to fifteen residents. Duties included grounds maintenance, greenhouse supervision, project planning and prioritizing, budgeting, and equipment maintenance and repair for the forty-seven acre grounds. 40 hrs./wk. 1975 to 1975 - Edmonds Community College, Lynnwood, Washington. Lead Gardener: Responsibilities included supervision of garden and grounds crews, budgeting, cost analysis, and project priorities. Several major landscape capital improvement projects were completed during my employment. Contractor supervision and project inspection were also among my duties. 40 hrs./wk. 1974 to 1974 - Everett Milling Company, Everett, Washington. Horticultures Sales: selling home garden chemicals, fertilizers, and machinery. Also required inventory control and purchasing skills. 48 hrs./wk. 1971 to 1974 - City of Everett, Everett, Washington. Horticultur'ist/Supervisor of Youth Work Program: Park development, park and City Hall grounds maintenance and restoration. Duties: required supervision of a large number of personnel, including their hiring, evaluation, and other related personnel matters; program budgeting for both departments; cost analysis; record keeping and program evaluation. Additionally I acted as horticulture/arboriculture advisor for park greenhouses and all maintenance, restoration and installation to landscaped areas. Special projects included installation inspection of Howarth Park, development of historical markers and tours, bike trials, children's parks design and installation and a children's zoo. 40 hrs./wk. 1970 to 1971 - Mukilteo School District, Mukilteo, Washington. Instructional assistant in high school horticulture, mathematics and computer science. Was the major contributor in the development of September 1987.? International Society of Arboriculture Training Conference, Seattle, Washington. Discussions and Field Demonstrations of the Shigometer.' April 1988: Washington State University Cooperative Extension Lecture Series, Pruning. July/August 1988: Conducted Arboricult'ural and Perennial Garden Tour, Scotland, Wales, and North England. November 1988: New Zealand and Timaru Alpine Garden Societies, Timaru and Dunedin, New Zealand. Plants of the Olympic Mountains. March 1989: Washington State University Cooperative Extension Lecture Series, Ornamental Tree and Shrub Pruning. March 1989: Puget Sound Small Tree Fruit Growers Association, Fruit Tree Restoration. November 1990: Washington State Pesticide Training Conference Diagnosis of Tree Problems. October 1992: New Tree Evaluation Guide Workshop, International Society of Arboriculture Pacific Northwest Chapter. February 1993: Hazard Tree Workshop, King County Cooperative Extension, Master Gardeners' Training. March 1993: Tree Appraisal Workshop, University of Washington, Center for Urban Horticulture, Washington State Department of Natural Resources. GRANTSAWARDED Washington State Commission for Vocational Education -Vocational Education Extension Program: A Cooperative Effort, 1978-1979. Washington State Commission for Vocational Education --Horticultural Therapy Curriculum Development, 1979-1980. Washington State Commission for Vocational Education Extension Program: Horticulture Media Production, 1979-1980. 0 0 the Washington State instructional model in Ornamental Horticulture, which was the curriculum standard for several years. 30 hrs./wk- 1969 to .1970 - Molbaks Greenhouse and -Nursery, Woodinville, Washington. Assistant Grower. Work concentrated on azalea, chrysanthemum and bedding plant production, and development of retail nursery. 54 hrs./wk. 1968 to 1969 - Washington State University, Pullman, Washington. Nurseryman: Duties were oper-ation of horticulture greenhouses, research documentation, instructional assistant and personnel supervision. 40 hrs./wk. Summer 1967 - Associated Sand and Gravel Co., Everett, Washington. Ceramic Tile Layer and Pre -stress Concrete Finisher: Responsible for inspection of pre -stress concrete modules. Job required reading structural plans. 40 hrs./wk. 1964 - 1966 Snohomish County Health District, Everett, Washington. Laboratory Assistant. 1962 to 1964 - Wight's Nursery, Lynnwood, Washington. Maintained seven acres landscape specimen nursery, 10 hrs./wk. year-round. Landscape installation worker during summer months. 40 hrs./wk. AFFILIATIONS American Forestry Association American Rock Garden Society Hardy Plant Society (Pacific Northwest Chapter and International) International Society of Arboriculture (Pacific Northwest Chapter and International) Specialty Nursery Association Utility Arborist Association BOARDS, COMMITTIES AND OFFICES Pacific Northwest Chapter of International Society of Arbor ' !culture - Founding Member, Board of Directors, 1986, 1985; Treasurer, 1988, 1987, 1984; Vice President, 1981-1983; Education Committee, 198 1; Training conference Committee Chairperson, 1987, 1984, 198 1, Certification Program Committee 1988, 1987; Species Evaluation Committee, 1990; Appraisal Basic Value Committee, 1993. � Pacific Northwest Chapter of American Rock Garden Society 7 Executive Board, 1982; Program Chairperson, 198 1; Study Weekend Committee, 1980-1983, 1987. American Primrose Society - Advertising Editor, Editor's Committee, 1980-1983. Hardy Plant Society - Founding Member, Study Weekend Committee, 1980-1986,1988. Interview Committee, Arboriculturist, City of Seattle, 1981. Interview Committee, Arboticulturist, City of Everett, 1982, 1987.1 Council of Tree & Landscape Appraisers Review Board for Eighth Edition, Guide For Plant Appraisal, 1992 LECTURES, TOURS, AND PROGRAMS June 1984: Education Department Central Washington University, Ellensburg, Washington. Computersin Early Childhood Education. August 1984: International Society of Arboriculture Training Seminar, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. Tree Evaluation and Damage Appraisals. July 1985: Center for Urban Horticulture, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington. Perennial Garden Tour. September 1985: International Soci . ety of Arboriculture, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. Training lecture on Drop -crotch Pruning. November 1985: American Public Works Association West Coast Training Session, Seattle, Washington. Street Tree'Problems and Solutions. May 1987: Washington State University Cooperative Extension Training Program. Pruning and Disease Diagnosis of Ornamental Trees and Shrubs. TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: The attached documents represent our claim for damages by the City of Echnonds. 1. Copy. of the plat showing the road easement. 2. Copy of the Claim for damages dated 3-15-93. 3. Copy of the cost estimate to replace canopy dated 2-28-93. 4. Copy of the letter to Public Works Director after 2nd tree fell dated 2-9-92. 5. Copy of letter from Robert Kerslake denying claim dated 4-&93. 6. Copy of letter from Robert Kerslake after visit and phone conversation dated 4-30-93.; 7. Copy of letter to Robert Kerslake in reply to letter of 4-&93, dated 5-20-93. kadir 7�m M " SAa a_ �IJ41 IS U-cd- t/L CA— vt C) CDV-I- 4,1 V"ax,es TKQ-�e— �--Oeev- vit nw-a-cot" fb C-� �- Vk X'C-� Z- ',-ILI 4 Q (Z� f z CITY C6 EDMONDS, 40 SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON N.W. COAXER. PLAT OF F.46DM.AC_. O/V. Z S7 -5. W. at S'41 00' E ?�143 �7, 457 7 Z 4. sw /27.2/ /Z7, ++ /Z 3. ?Z /Z 7. e- 7 T/I rl, Ci Z 7. ?0 123.40 YZ3.2 1 /28. /40 ��IIVAC. N 8 *S&'00'4 2 2-Ir (k 12 /4Z/.38 N *Co g- 9(,-57'377� N 0 uj .0 e% io /00 MOA/ /,,V CAS—C 1weRlo 1A A/: A _S S It M eD QD Aor —60 .0 EAST" J0_/. 0? ?0-.,4 CST. 5 W. ------ CeNr- 0.- SEC rION :3 CLAIM FOR DAMAGES, Claim must be filed with the City Clerk. TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS:, PLEASE TAKE NOTICE, THAT L IL L 1) �tl WHO NOW RESIDES AT CQCI-310 - 9'q+" Pl. LJ - (State present actual addres's by street, number and city) AND WHO FOR SIX MONTHS PRIOR TO DATE OF ACCIDENT HAS RESIDED AT residence by street, number and city7- CLAIMS DAMAGES OF AND FROM THE CITY OF EDMONDS IN THE.SUM OF $ 1) 090i qo�� arising out of the following circumstance ,s: 3 ajlua.,11 2D, lclq_3 q�j L1.1tiFid 61 Describe Claim, giving �OLIA�61U' DATE and TIME injury or Prvp0_Afj; lzp��kd td-PIAAg 011 OtLir -W'AV4 Taifbft- damage occurred, PLACE (!Z kiZ�J [LCa7bd M mtr n rt-o9MY4 ) t, 4d �Mla,,, k2i 4- and full particulars. hp yi��, -�%Wk tJKpdA4-7-iLekLt- 0Q.1k.i Accurately locate and (11 140 PftVnP V k 4" paq-matr �o Ct, LLkxL;&Lq describe defects causing 6ftk% q�t 4W.C.L, bulilb?t injury or damage and i6 q(Q avrf qtet ia 92- �� 44ai haS ii4 Wx 5& 44t) all acts of negligence 000, tur PMy_*Sk-tV, k;f;, have. lh�cl( claimed. t4m PKe itevev 4(� okk i-c-ei irk Olt -4-4�- a -e -d-& Accurately describe J I injuries or damage LLr FiD ra q v -U a te. Ca 6 Itht t C ItAt ' * -d.., 11 4,,,t L L4;,-flu 0,4' (U1W -"w St A �ki 'J State items of damage 4?1,(! claimed. Itemize all expenses and losses. 41"! it Ci rm i z_> 41a (Claim must be sworn to by claimant) . _FS i g n aAi r 6--o f C I a i-m- SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN before me this 0 _A� '19 N, T A L L 29, a Public iTFa-nd for:,4he Of - 4., �y shington, residing at BILL'S CAtjCp-E3 9680 =16 HWY S9 W'A S3Mo POO) 7762077 REDIFORK KEEP THIS SLIP 5L350101350 FOR REFERENCE 0 0 11� T j February 9, 1992 HAND DELBIERED Director of Public Works City of Edmonds 250 - 5th Ave. N. Edmonds, WA 98020 Dear Sir. This letter is in regards to a road easement (204th Stred) which is located directly behind our property. In the last year, two (2) trees have fallen on separate occasions from this easement onto our backyard. Several neighbors called the City of Edmonds to have the trees removed and city employees came and removed the trees. In fact; the last tree that fell the city employees gave most of the wood to my neigIftr, Stefanie Hall . Another neighbor, Paul Kappus, called the City of Edmonds to request removal of the tree since his son uses that easement to access his paper route and he was not able to ride his bike through the easement due to the fallen tree. Fortunately we do not yet have a fence so there was no damage to our property as a result of the trees falling onto our yard. However, we do have cause for concern because we plan to construct a fence in the near future and had we had-, a* fence when both of these trees fell, a fence would have been demolished on two sides. It seems apparent to us that something is going on with this area of trees or soil and we resp6cffWly request that the trees located on this easement be removed before another one falls down. Removal of the trees would prevent any further damage to our property. We would appreciate your prompt response to this problem before any more trees fall. If our house or property is damaged, we are putting the City of Edmonds on notice that we believe there is a problem with this area of trees and we cqxd the City of Edmonds to assume responsibility for any damages if any more trees fall from the city easement onto our property. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerely, Larry & Karen Dillow 20310 - 84th Pl. W. Edmonds, WA 98026 WAS11.M TON - OREGON CLAIM SERVICE "Claim Administ�ation and Adjustment" April 6, 1993 Mr. Larry Dillow 20310 84th Place West Edmonds, WA 98026 RE: Our Client: Date of Loss: Our File: Dear Mr. Dillow: City of Edmonds T -�- T%:Il- -- �-&Aj �"A�vv 01-20-93 3-3079 OA- As you know, we had a record wind storm on January 20, 1993. Trees fell throughout the County. Prior to the windstorm there was no indication the trees were a hazard. Although the damage to your property is certainly unfortunate, it occurred due to an act of naLure. The City of Edmonds did not. cause your damages, and I have no atternative but to deny your claim. If you have any questions, please feel free to give me a call 367-5580. 'b-bert Kcrslal= Jr. Manager Seattle Office RK/mdt cc: City of Edmonds, Art Housler WCIA FAX (206) 363,2332 P.O. BOX 25W P.O. Box 9490 P.O ' Box 9611 5319SAW809"Or.aw P.O. BDX 1087 Ssaft.WA96125 Warw%WA99M%9490 Yakima, WA 98M PwWA OR 97221 Parx9oton. OR 97801 24 I'm (206) 367-SW 24 hr. (W% 328-1851 24 tw. (W% 966-SM .1 24 hr. ISM 297-7905 24 hr. (50 27&3M 861d ISM) 48""1 P.O. Box 7187 130 Eag Main St OB36 P.O. Box U37 Eugero, OR 9740 MWbrd. OR 97501 KLvnajh FaK OR 97601 24 �d. (503) 464-0"1 24 IV. (503) 77"WI 24 hr. (5M 102-630 & 0, WASHINGTON - OREGON CLAIM SERVICE "Claim Administration and Adjustment" April 30, 1993 Larry and Karen Dillow 20310 84th Place West Edmonds, Washington 98026 RE: Our Client: City of Edmonds Claimant: Larry Dillow Date of Loss: 01-20-93 Our File: 3-3079 Dear Larry & Karen:. Thank you for taldng the time to talk with me about your claim. As you know, the trees behind your property appear to be healthy. There is no sign of disease and there is no indication that they are unusually hazardous. The trees were there before you moved into your home. Additionall�, the tree fell during a record windstorm over which, the City of Edmonds had no control. Although the damage to your canopy certainly is unfortunate, the City of Edmonds did not cause it to happen and I have no alternative but to continue to deny your claim. If you have any questions, please feel free to give me a call at 367-5580. Sincerely, Robert rslake, Jr. Manager Seattle Office RK/mdt cc: City of Edmonds, Art Housler WCIA FAX (206) 363-ZLV Bv4 (SM) 484-0441 P.O. BOX 25549 P.O. Box 9490 P.O. Box 9811 5319 S.W. Wr." Dr. 8M P.O. BOX tog? PD. Box 7187 130 Eag Min SL 01336 P.O. Box 1437. SaaWs.WASS125 Sp*ane. WA 99MSIA90 Yakima. WA 9M PonowA OR 97221 Pwgisamm OR 97801 Eugm. OR 97401 Medb(d.OR975011 ftnaM FJs. OR 976DI 24 rd. (2W 367-5%2 24 hr. (50% 328-1851 24 hr. (5" 966-SMS 24 rd. (5P 297-7WS 24hr.(503)276-=l 24 tv. (W3) 484-0441 24 hr. (503) 779-8%1 24 tw. (503) M-WO is May 20, 1993 Robert Kerslake, Jr. Washington -Oregon Claim Service P.O. Box 25549 Seattle, WA 98125 RE: Date of Loss: Claimant: Your Client: Dear Mr. Kerslake: 1-20-93 Larry Dillow City of Edmonds In response to your letter of April 6, 1993, we disagree with your statement that, "prior to the windstorm, there was no indication the trees were a hazard." Several employees of the City of Edmonds were notified by us on several occasions prior to January 20, 1993 that two trees from the easement had already fallen onto our property. In fact, the last tree that fell before January 20, 1993 was removed by City of Edmonds employees. Therefore,- how can you say there was no indication the trees were a hazard. Obviously if trees are falling down, there is an indication that a problem may exist. The City of Edmonds did nothing to investigate our concerns even after we notified them that two trees had fallen in the past and they physically removed one of the trees. Now the number of trees is three instead of two that have fallen fromthis easement. Even after filing a claim for damages and contact with you, nothing has been done to investigate if there is a problem with the trees and/or surrounding soil. Our attorney has advised us that because the City of Edmonds had prior knowledge of our concerns regarding the trees falling onto our property and neglected to do anything about it, they are responsible for repairi ' ng/replacing our truck canopy. We respectfully request payment (as requested in our damage claim) Ve made promptly or we will be forced- to litigate to recover the costs to replace the truck canopy. Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter. Sincerely, Larry & Karen Dillow 20310 - 84th Pl. W. Edmonds, WA 98026 cc: Art Housler, City of Edmonds - Pq A E3BANSIdlee Tom Fisher Senior Account Agent 19106 Hwy.99 Ste. B Lynnwood, WA 98036 77S4511 December 31, 1994 MRS. KAREN DILLOW 20310 84 PL. W. EDMONDS, WA 98026 DEAR MRS. DILLOW: It is very common in our business to deal with damage done by trees falling; and almost as common to have the trees owned by someone other than our policy holder. I remember the tree incident of January 20 1993 very clearly and have checked our records to get the details. All this kind of damage is covered on your home policy if the damaged item is personal property. The disappointing thing that has caused me to remember this 50 well is that vehicles and parts Of vehicles are not covered on the hao*me policy. Further, Mi5Cellaneou5 personal property is covered on the home policy without notifying us; but, to be covered we have to add vehicles to the policy. However, it is clear to me that the owner of the tree is responsi- ble for the canopy damage. Most often the tree owner is not liable because he has no knowledae of the hazard in advance and so has no chance to prevent the damage nor does he have any part in Causing the damage. This reasoning does not work with you and your canopy and the descriptive phrase "act of god" does not fit. The tree owner did have prior knowledge that there was a much greater than normal risk of trees falling on you and your family and your things because you warned them about it on more than one Occasion. Also, other trees had fallen in close proximity to the January 20 tree and you had -notified the free owner about that. My biggest regret is that there was no coverage with our insurance company and that you have had to 5iug it out on your, own. Had we paid for this damaQe� we woL;'-,d most cerf a in 1 have CeqLj�_S ted DayMerl t from your neighbor because his failure tn ac, aF,er beinc�, put on notice generates direct resoponsibility for the damage. Karen, thiG letter 5hould be taken a s -, g a :,:harir ) of thOUgth PrOCe55 and rea7oningj. I do not wish to give you lecial advice and am not licensed to do 50. 0 April 4, 1994 Jeff Wilson City of Edmonds 250 - 5th Ave. N. Edmonds, WA 98026 Dear Jeff: HAND DELIVERED blk-c4e-' 4Aq 0 41. This letter will serve as an official request to execute the enclosed agreement that was drafted by Scott Snyder as a resolution to our easement/fence problem. We would like to get this situation resolved in a timely fashion. Please do not hesitate to contact me at 778-1925 if you need additional information. Sincerely, Larry & Karen Dillow 20310 - 84th Pl. W. Edmonds, WA 98026 Enclosures a ;% CITY OF EDMONDS LARRY S. NALIGHTEN Z.G* MAYOR 250 - 5TH AVE. N. EDMONDS, WA 98020 (206) 771-3202 COMMUNITY SERVICES.' PETER E. HAHN Public Works * Planning e Parks and Recreation Engineering DIRECTOR 19C) October 17, 1991 Karen Dillow 20310 84th Place Edmonds, WA 98026 Dear Ms. Dillow: Subject: DRAFT "FENCE SETTLEMENT" Enclosed for your review is a copy of the draft "fence settlement" which was prepared by the City Attorney. I would appreciate your any.comments which you may have to offer on this draft, so that I may schedule this item for the earliest possible Council meeting to finally bring this issue to a resolution. If you should have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me at 771-3202 Sincerely, i f rey S. ?e Wilson, AICP Current Planning Supervisor Enclosure DIL-FENC/10-17-9l.CORRES * Incorporated August 11, 1890 0 Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan 9 0 SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT WHEREAS, the undersigned Karen Dillow and Larry W. Dillow, the owners of.certain property described in this Agreement, have asserted- claims that a public walk -way easement was improperly relocated by administrative action of the City of Edmonds to a location immediately adjacent to their residential property, and have asserted that they have been damaged . thereby; WHEREAS, the City of Edmonds believes that in all respects it has acted appropriately and in conformance with law with respect to the relocation of the public easement; WHEREAS, both parties, while believing their position to be correct, wish to resolve this matter in accordance with the terms and conditions set forth in this Settlement Agreement, NOW THEREFORE, Larry W. pillow and Karen Dillow, husband and wife (hereinafter "Owners") and the City of Edmonds, Washington, an optional code municipal corporation (hereinafter 11city"), enter into this Settlement Agreement under the terms and conditions set forth herein. 1. Consideration of Parties. In consideration of the waivers, release, and hold harmless of the Owners set forth herein, the city of Edmonds agrees to pay the sum of ($ 1. Z--X0. 41 ) . This amount has been determined and arrived at as the cost of installing a four foot high fence along the boundary of the hereinafter described residential property and a pedestrian walkway 0006.05002H/WSS52088A WSS/mls 02/12/90-1 0 0 easement. Upon payment of the aforementioned sum, the obligations of the City of Edmonds shall be and are at an end. 2. Subiect Site. The subject site is located at 20310 84th Place, Edmonds, Washington and is legally described as: Lot 8, Pine Ridge Estates according to the plat thereof recorded at Book . Page of the records of Snohomish County, Washington. 3. Construction of Pence. The aforementioned sum has been provided by the City of Edmonds in consideration of the Release, Waiver and Hold Harmless and Indemnity Provisions contained in this Agreement. While calculated upon the cost of constructing a fence adjacent to the public walkway and on the property of the owners, nothing herein shall be interpreted to require the Owners to construct such fence. The Owners are notified that construction of a fence in excess of four feet in height is regulated by the provisions of Chapter 17.30 of the Edmonds Community Development Code. Fences less than four feet in height do not require a permit from the City. A fence in excess of four feet and up to six feet requires the specific approval of the building official. Nothing herein shall be interpreted to exempt the owners from the restrictions and regulations of -the Community Development Code and Chapter 17.30 thereof. 4. Touch and Concern the Land. This Agreement is a covenant which touches and concerns the affected property. At the option of the City of Edmonds it may be recorded. As a covenant, touching and concerning the land, this Agreement shall 0006.05002H/WSS52088A -2- WSS/mls 02/12/90-1 0 bind all future Owners and successors in interest in the aforementioned subject site. S. Waiver. Release, Hold Harmless and Indemnification Provision. The Owners, on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors in interest and assigns, do hereby waive and relinquish any and all claims as hereinafter described and promise to hold harmless and indemnify the City of Edmonds, it's officers, agents and employees from any and all claims of any kind or nature arising from or out of the actions and administrative approvals of the City of Edmonds, it's officers, agents and employees with respect to the location or relocation of a pedestrian walkway easement, public utility easements and the underlying approval of the plat of Pine Ridge Estates which have occurred to the date of execution of this Agreement. This promise to hold harmless and indemnify shall apply to any loss, claim or liability of any kind or nature whether occurring to persons or property and arising as above set forth. 6. Whole Agreement, Amendment. This Agreement constitutes the whole agreement between the parties and is not based on any representation, written or oral not contained within the body of this Agreement. This Agreement shall be amended only upon the express written consent of all the parties hereto. DONE this day of 1 1990. OWNERS: Larry W. Dillow 0006.05002H/WSS52088A -3- WSS/mls 02/12/90-1 9 0 Karen Dillow STATE OF WASHINGTON ) )ss: COUNTY OF I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Larry W. Dillow signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his free and voluntary act for the purposes mentioned in this instrument. DATED this day of STATE OF WASHINGTON ) )ss: COUNTY OF r 1990. NOTARY PUBLIC my commission expires: I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Karen Dillow signed this instrument and -acknowledged it to be her free and voluntary act for the pu rposes mentioned in this instrument. DATED this day of 1990. NOTARY PUBLIC My commission expires: THE CITY OF EDMONDS 0006.05002H/WSS52088A -4- WSS/mls 02/12/90-1 0 0 Attest/Approved: Jacqueline G. Parrett, City Clerk Approved as to form: City Attorneyo 0006.05002H/WSS52088A -5- WSS/mls 02/12/90-1., 33 6 202N S.W.b 14 A u /A. so 7 - 5 E::3 T E S N 0. 2 4 . L2 L314 5 6 7 . W 0 b 2 tn 202ND. PL. S.W. 00 14 13 12 11 Io\ 9 I \ 11 Io\ 9 ,GRANADA ESTATES 15 18 19 20 21 16 17 S. W. LAURI ANN PARK 2 3 4 5 27 26 25 21 205 TH— PL. S.W. 1 2 3 4 DE LONG ADD. 23 22 S-4-6-78 15') 0 60 So 13 12 2 LLJ > 3 lo r- 4 CC) 50 80 5 y 7\ 6 ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 202 ND ST 50 30 120 3 4-� 4 CD 5 S. W. 50 17 30 .... . 1� 6 PINE 3 a. 7 3 30 7P A RK S 3 3 Go-- 2 50 4 20-3f 5) 90 99 w 6 a. 0 HE.Gl' SE T' S ok 110 z - -- A -204TH ST S 33 i 60 15 :72 4 80 - 2 34 16 25 3 35 A B C -4 17 26 L-LJ 36 < '18 27 L.Li A B 6 (-) < 19 2 El 36 20 -7 29 39 co — 8 21 30 40- (o 00 22 31 23 32 10 2 0 7 T H -T. 21 'T S W 2,207 ST S W Q I --I I T 1.3 6 ol 20 130 1 -2 MAI N ST. 0 0 ..... 47- 6 45 44 14 LL Ld X 0- 1-m P I N E RIDGE PA � 1p 0 � 9 10 o an 8 11 7 - 12 90 5 14 so � 4 Lu 15 Ix 3 16 1 0 w 02 x < X, 33 L ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 50 ; - 3 30 120 0 S.W.b ui 202ND* PL . > 1 4 RA AD so — 5 f3 2 1 7 E:: T ES NO. 2 CD 0 t., 5 to 50 , 3 4 5 6 7 202 ND ST S. W. 0 60 30 0 17 3 6 Ln 202ND. P-L. S.W. 17, r 12 2 PINE _j fjDQL -- 14 13 12 0 9 . ..... Q- > 7 .GRANADA ES ATE S < 3 F- 0 -7PARKS 15 18 19 3 3 20 21 3: 10 4 OD co 4 16 17 - 50. 50 2031 5 90 I S. W. 9 z ---- 00 5 99 w 6 0 LA Rl ANN PARK . .... a. 0 HEGl 4 2031 5 90 HE.G� 8 L 3 4 5 7 6 E I S 0 -A I uj OT OPEN 0 30 > ':,204TH ST S W 27 < 33 a 0 15 60 24 2 34 16 25 26 0 35 FT 17 26 1:;2' aA B c 4 25 L-LJ 3 66 u COD 00 7— < 27 PINE RIDGE PA .9-2, 205 TH PL. S. W. L.Li 1 2 3 4 5 6 A U 19 - .2 El < 36 D E L ONG AOD 20 29 -7 39 23 co 21 8 30 40. z w 22 9L . (0 22 31 0 9 S-46-78 (15') 00 0 in —!t- in ?3 3-2) N 10 0207TH S T. S.W. % 21 00207 ST S W 0 13 2 6 01 20 1 46 45 44 30 130 14 I It -2 MAIN ST. 0 w < 45 9 2 S OR I S E 40� TOMM PAF K ...... ... /�o w A cr ADD. Nd 3 L) 0 0 8 4e 4 3 TOMMY P ARK I , to LL LDGE 45 — 2 7 12 4 6 6 209g PL. S.W. w 6 90 13 A. 13 S-23-73 00 8 > 5 14 50 ADD N. NO. 4 10 50 4 6 7 X 4 15 C. LU -w < a: U) 2 _J3 16 tA �d 2 0 w 6 F- 7 00. 5. 02 < . . '' < S--35-79 6 5 4 Z ) W 7 33 202ND 0 S W.b 2 PL. S 't RA ADA* . so 3 2 5 7 E:S T ES I NO. 2 4 3 4 5 6 7 2 tn 202ND. PL. S.W. 00 14 13 1 12 \ I I 10\ 9 .GRANADA ESTATES 15 18 19 20 21 16 17 S. W. LAURI ANN PARK 2 3 4 5 27 26 25 2�! 205 TH PL. S. W. 1 2 3 4 5 6 DE LONG A D D. 23 22 S-46-78 (15') 0 60 50 --77- 12 2 Ld > 3 10 4 0 9 00 (10 P7 8 ELEME NTAR Y SCHOOL 3 202 ND ST uv 30 120 > 1 4 C 50 S. W. 0 17 :IN 30 6 P El -i 20-a 7 30 7PA� RKS 00 3 3 2 2 50 4 2031 )4 5 90 z 99 w 6 a. 0 HE.Gl A� S > -0,204TH ST S W 1 1 44 33 15 24 so — 2 34 16 JI) 3 25 35 r A 17 26 W 36 u < .18 27 Ld U 19 A B 6 < 2 El 36 NO 20 0 in .7 29 Lf) 39 VI) co -- -- 8 -r 21 30 40. (c) 00 22 3 1] t 23 S. W. in 32 0, 10 207TH —CT. - %...— 1 21 o 207 ST S W 0 -".% I 6 01 20 301 130 1 2 MAIN ST. 0 ID 14 45 44 j6U 1 3 V) ILL w ,7 0- Of P I N E RIDGE PA 9 10 0 D. 7 12 90 13 5 14 50 4 15 Y— < cr 3 C) 16 1, 0— w 02 0 -4-40000- CJ 890 - 1 9 C� May 6, 1993 CITY OF EDMONDS 250 - 5TH AVE. N. - EDMONDS, WA 980.20 - (206) 771-0220 - FAX (206) 771-0221 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT Public Works * Planning * Parks and Recreation e Engineering Larry and Karen Dillow 20301 84th Place West Edmonds, WA 98026 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Dillow: LAURA M. HALL MAYOR Subject: PINE RIDGE ESTATES PEDESTRIAN EASEMENT AND FENCE SETTLEMENT Thank you 'for your patience in allowing me to review the material which you provided regarding the location of the pedestrian easement across your neighbors property, and your concern with the placement of a fence along the easement next to your property. As a follow- up to our conversation earlier this week regarding your concerns and issues, I am taking this opportunity to provide you with written confirmation on the conclusions which I have reached. From a review of the records which you have provided and the records contained in the plat file, it is very clear that a condition was imposed on the plat to provide a pedestrian easement through the southern end of the plat, as a means to provide pedestrian access to Pine Ridge Park. However, what is not entirely clear is how the easement ended up in its location. While I understand the concerns you have with the location of the easement, the easement has been in place since the approval of the plat, and it has been providing the function which it was intended to provide. With respect to your draft settlement with the City for the installation of a fence along your property line'ladjacent to the easement, the City Attorney has advised me that the proper course of action for you to pursue approval of the City, is to submit a request to the City Council. The "fence settlement" issue which has been under discussion since approximately 1990, requires formal approval by the City, and Council authorization to expend the funds approved in the agreement. The best course of action to pursue final approval of the settlement and authorization of funds, would be for you to address a request to the Mayor. I appreciate the effort you put forth in helping me to understand to a greater degree the history of this issue. However, while there may appear to be some points of uncertainty as to how certain events and decisions were reached pertaining to the easement location, I believe that the end product serves the intent of the plat condition. D1LFFNCE15-&93.00RRES/LET-rERS 9 Incorporated Auqust 11, 1890 0 Sister Cities International — Hekinan, JaiDan The issue of the fence settlement, which you have been pursuing for approximately 3 years could potentially be resolved with a request to the Council for appropriation of funds to construct the fence, however, I can not guarantee that this will occur. If the Council does approve the "fence settlement", it is my belief that the majority of your concerns with the pedestrian easement should be resolved. If You should have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at 711-0223. Sincerely, Community Services Department - Planning Division Jeffrey S. Wilson, AICP Current Planning Supervisor pc: File No. P-6-79 Dillow Fence Settlement File Mayor Hall Scott Snyder, City Attorney Rob Chave, Planning Manager DILFENCE/5-6-91CORRES/LETTERS 0 0 March 24, 1993 Jeff Wilson Planning Department City of Edmonds 250 - 5th Ave. N. Edmonds, WA 98026 Dear Jeff: *4 S49S� Pursuant to our phone conversation today, I am enclosing supporting documentation regarding the easement between lot 8 and lot 9 of Pine Ridge Estates. 1. Copy of Staff Review of Proposed Subdivision for P-6-79 stating required improvements and dedications: (2) walks or pedestrians ways required between lot 10 & 11. Also states 8' easement for path to park between lots 10 & 11. 2. Copy of Attachment to Page 2 of Planner's Review Form for P-6-79. Item #3 (a) lists Dedicate an 8' easement between lots 10 & 11 for path to park. Strength: Will provide pedestrian access to the northwest portion of Pine Ridge Park. 3. Copy of Recommended Motion for P-6-79. Item #3 lists that an 8' wide pedestrian easement be established between Lots 10 & I I (crossed out to show 9 & 10) be surfaced and outfitted with a lockable wood bollard. Item #4 fists that the sidewalk extend to and connect with the 8' easement between lots 10 & 11 (crossed out to show 9 & 10). 4. Copy of Page 3 of Recommended Motion states that P-6-79 be approved with the following conditions: (1) The granting of an 8' easement between lots 10 & 11 for a pedestrian path to Pine Ridge Park. Recommended that approval be made for the following reasons: (4) It will provide a pedestrian access to Pine Ridge Park. 5. Copy of memo dated 6/27/79 from Jim Jessel to Mary Lou Block. See highlighted references to develop a finished pedestrian access to the park. This easement should be 8 feet wide to allow emergency vehicle access to the park and should have a wooden bollard blocking off undesired vehicle access. This new walkway would be a valuable addition to our Pine Ridge Park pedestrian circulation plan. 6. Copy of the Edmonds Planning Commission minutes dated June 27, 1979. P-6-79 was listed under the Agenda heading. Further minutes state: An 8' access easement between lots 10 and 11 will be required to lead to Pine Ridge Park and a side yard setback will be required from.that easement. Ms. Block recommended approval with the following conditions: Item #3 states that an 8' wide pedestrian easement be established between lots 10 and 11, to be surfaced and outfitted with a lockable wood bollard. Item #4 states that the sidewalk extend to an connect with the 8' easement between lots 10 and I I - Item #5 states that a pedestrian walkway be constructed along the west side of 84th Ave. W. from the improved portion of the road south to Pine Ridge Park. Page 2 - Jerry Swanson said the walkway between Lots 10 and I I should be shifted to the end of the cul-de-sac where it exits to the park property. Ms. Block responded that the City would have no objection to relocating it between lots 9- and 10 and the applicant also was agreeable to that. Mr. Schillberg said he was satisfied. Page 3 - Commissioner Smith agreed that the walkway would be better located between lots 9 and 10 than between 10 and 11. Commissioner Smith then moved, seconded by Commissioner Ross, that P-6-79 be approved with the conditions and for the reasons given by Ms. Block in her presentation, with the exception that the 8' walkway easement will be between lots 9 and 10, rather than between lots 10 and 11. Motion carried. Letter to Jeff Wilson March 24, 190 7. Copy of Pags 3-5 of the Edmonds City Council Minutes dated August 21, 1979. Preliminary Approval of Pine Ridge Estates, P-6-79. Page 4, item #3 that an 8' wide pedestrian easement be established between lots 9 and 10, to be surfaced and outfitted with a lockable wood bollard; (4) that the sidewalk extend to and connect with the 8' easement between lots 9 and 10; (5) that a pedestrian walkway be constructed along the west,side of 84th Ave. W. from the improved portion of the road south to Pine Ridge Park. 8. Copy of Memo from Mary Lou Block to Harve Harrison dated December 10, 1981 stating the subdivision was given preliminary approval by the City Council on August 21, 1979 and that the applicant has complied with all the required conditions and asking for final approval of this plat. 9. Copy of Edmonds City Council Minutes dated December 15, 1981 under Consent Agenda. Item #J Approval of final 17-lot plate of Pine Ridge Estates. 10. Copy of the subdivision plat drawing showing the 8' walkway easement located between lots 9 and 10 as required. 11. Copy of a drawing Doris Belt drew for us before our house was even built. The drawing is in her handwriting and does not show any easement with respect to the location of our house, however, it does show boundary lines. I include this drawing to substantiate the fact that we were not told about the easement prior to the purchase of our home. 12. Copy of our initial title report we received with regard to the purchase of our home on December 11, 1985. As you will note, the only information regarding any easement is listed on Exhibit B, #3 where it references an easement granted to Public Utility District #1 of Snohomish County, General Telephone Company of the Northwest, Inc., and CATV with regard to underground utilities. No where does it mention any walkway or water easement on lot #8. 13. Copy of a letter dated June 24, 1987 from our appraiser stating that the proposed easement to our property would have a negative influence on marketability which is one reason why we opposed the easement being located on our property. 14. After harrassment and coercion from Tom & Doris Belt, Diana & Rene VanLouvren, we reluctantly agreed to the proposed walkway easement. A copy of that proposed easement as signed by us and notarized is enclosed. As you will notice, there was no mention of a watermain or utility easement in the easement document. 15. A copy of the easement document after the VanLouvren's returned it to Mary Lou Block and she added her additional requirements regarding the utility easement. You can compare the handwriting and verify that the additional wording was added by Mary Lou Block. This document was then returned to us for initialing of the additional utility easement wording which we strenously objected. As we have since discovered thanks to Noel Miller, there was no reason to include any wording regarding the utility easement because the watermain is not located on our property, which was an incorrect assumption made by Mary Lou Block. 16. A copy of a letter dated 8/15/87 from Tom Belt asking for the return of the easement documents after the addition of the utility easement wording. 17. Copy of a letter dated 9/11/87 from us to Tom and Doris Belt responding to their 8/15/87 letter. 18. Copy of a letter dated 1/19/88 to Mary Lou Block from us regarding the easement issue. 19. Copy of a letter dated 2/11/88 from Mary Lou Block in response to our 1/19/88 letter. Letter to Jeff Wilson March 24, 1993 20. Copy of a letter dated 12/21/89 from Mayor Naughten after he reviewed the easement situation. Unfortunately, it was not known at that time that the watermain was not located on our property, therefore the requirement of the utility easement should not have been required. 21. Copy of a letter dated 3/22/90 from Mayor Naughten with the fence resolution. 22. Copy of a letter dated 5/22/91 to Mayor Naughten from us with two fence bids. 03. CDpj o,� teoyyW PIM- +o Nr�,- After receivi6g— the agreement from Scott Snyder for the City to pay to construct a fence, another attempt to get to the bottom of this easement situation was made when we contacted Noel Miller. It was always assumed by Mary Lou Block that the watermain was located on our property (lot 8), therefore the request for 5 feet of the 10 foot easement was to be located on lot 8. However, no one ever investigated to substantiate that the watermain was indeed located on lot 8. Mary Lou Block only assumed from information she received from Tom & Doris Belt, that the watermain was indeed located on lot 8. After Mr. Miller came out and investigated, it was discovered that the watermain is not located on lot 8 but all on lot 9. So after all these years the City was trying to get us to grant a utility easement on our property for no reason. It is very disturbing to us that this entire easement hassle with our neighbors which has resulted in our neighbors hating us, wouldn't have happened if the City had done their homework and found out before requesting that our neighbors (the VanLouvren's, daughter of Tom & Doris Belt) obtain an easement from us when there was no need to request one in the first place. We could have avoided all of this hassle and emotional distress that has gone on over the last seven years, not to mention the time involved all because Mary Lou Block believed the information she received from Tom & Doris Belt instead of researching it through the proper City departments to make sure that the information she was receiving was indeed correct. What is the purpose of having the Planning Commission and City Council's approval of developments if the requirements are not going to be upheld by the City? It is clear that the City was negligent in several areas: 1. The City allowed the developer to locate a required easement in a location that was not approved by the City Council. 2. The City allowed Mary Lou Block, Planning Department Manager, to put pressure on a homeowner to issue an easement to the City without good cause. Mary Lou Block failed to research where the watermain was before requesting such easement. In summary, we believe it is clear from the enclosed documents that it was recommended and approved by the City Council that the 8' walkway easement be located between lots 9 & 10, never between lots 8 & 9 as it currently is. Someone, somewhere, put that easement in the wrong place and the City never followed up to make sure that the requirements for development of the subdivision were being complied with. The purpose and intent of the walkway easement which was a requirement of the approval of the development have never been fulfilled - that of providing pedestrian access to Pine Ridge Park. We hereby request that the City of Edmonds correct this problem and abate the walkway easement that is currently located between lots 8 & 9. fticerely, K id KarenlDillow 20310 - 84th Pl. W. Edmonds, WA 98026 Enclosures CITY OF EDMONDS OFILE # P-6-79 PLANNING DIVISION ADDRESS: 2.nd Strept S_ STAFF REVIEW OF PROPOSED SUBDIVISION 84th Avenue --West -n' to APPL I CANWX� dfl<�TTAfti 9 IR HEARING DATt:jj�� ANALYSIS OF DESIGN Lot sizes and dimensions: a. Areas and setbacks: All lots over 8,000 square feet. Setbacks drawn on lots 1 & 17 should be corrected prior to hearing. b. Lot dimension ratio: All lot dimension ratios- greater than .4 c. Corner lots:. Building envelopes of Lots 1 & 17 greater than 35% of lot area 2-1.01 O_C_Cangement in relation to topograp : Lot arrangement logical for tap2ZKa h _�y y_y which slopes at 25% on Lot 10 and 33% on Lot 11. 3. Lot width & frontage: All lot widths are greater than 70', all frontages greater than 35' 4. Protection of natural features, views, open spaces:Special attention should be given to -----the preservation of the-trees-.- 5. Tree Cutting Restrictions: TO BE IMPOSED ON ALL TREES 8" DIAMETER & OVER PER SECTIOV 12.10.050 (c) (2). ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 1. Located in environmentally sensitive areas? —No 2.Shorelines Management Permit? No 3. Env. Cklist Reqld? Yes 4. Negative Declaration? 5. EIS Required? 6. Planning Division Environmental Assessment REQUIRED IMPROVEMENTS AND DEDICATIONS 1. See City Engineer's Report. a, gs a "An wa 3. ' Parks or other facilities required? 17 X $300 or dedication 4. Special requirements or conditions*WS-Idewallk zshould,:jbt.,-c k-'b' to par --etwee.n,- Lots 10 11. Pj BY: DATE June 20 19 7 9 EDMONDS PLANNING DIVISION COMMENTS AND ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS ATTACHED IF APPLICABLE BY: ENGINEERING DIVISION (DATE) BY: PUBLIC WORKS t) BY: IRE DEPARTMENT 60 L'W (DATE) RECOMMENDAT I OtA4 I It ATTACHMENT TO PAGE 2 OF'PLANNER'S REVIEW FORM FILE #P-6-79 2),.Develop as a PRD: Strength: By clustering single family homes on the level northwest portion of the site, the developer would be able to preserve the natural woodland vegetation on the sloping southeastern portion as-a-buf-f-er-for-the-park-an-d-t-c�-r-4�-dTc-��—p6-te-fft-i-a-l— erosion and drainage problems. Additionally, if the homes were designed to occupy less ground space and more vertical space (the townhouse approach), impervious surfaces could be reduced and a buffer of naturgl-w-oQd.land-vegetation--could— be left around the entire site to minimize the impact upon the neighborhood as much as possible. Weakness: The developer would incur additional design expense, as well as those expenses associated with additional delays and City administration fees. 3) Approval of proposal as submitted with the following conditions:' a _�an 40- e0dic e semen t.�e tween 116ts -1 k r h or -p Strtagth- jWri--acces ey I _provide,--p6d& - - s. to ..t e -northwest & mo A 411 � "m' ark P). rity mnaof '26 Weakness: May require a flag lot determination for lot 12 by reducing lot frontage to less that 31 of the required lot width and/or the granting of a minor code modification for lot 11 by reducing the lot width. b) 'Impose strict tree cutting restrictions and control: Strength: Will give the City more control 6ver the potent ial unnecessary or arbitrary removal of large trees which should be preserved where possible to minimize adverse envir6nmental impacts. Weakness:- May cause slight delay in development to.allow planners to approve the tree -cutting. RECOMMENDED MOTION Therefore, I recommend that P-6-79 be approved with the following conditions: 1) That the right-of-way be increased -to allow for *we planter islands in the center of the cul-de-sac; that the islands be located to include existing trees, if possible; and that the remainder of the islands be planted with landscape materials to be maintained by the adjacent property owners. 2)--Th-atf-5--tx-46--f6b�c—pi-afi-te-r—gtr- p be included between the sidewalk and the curb along the east side of 84th Place West; 3) hat an 1,"wide' -r.ian,.,O-as,emeitt,,,b,e-es.E-al;!,i;hed _bei7%WiR`_'1,16Fs' pp4 st aq;e4.,A. _-outf itted.,V.1th.'A. -lock a�bi_e` __w_$6'-d sr-, 10 4) ex tend to and-.; connec t,.�with �th 0�3__easement ............ ti . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...... 5) jpThA`t—,ia b�j 'cons t r I ucted 916nk'-'he west side th"AvenuO_ -Wes-t 1 r6i ".the mvr;oved_ por tion- o f ihe"' f 6�0- 9-6u f F� *to 6) That tre onl be rempv�W the expxw* approval 1). the City I so -�Uied expert, such as Planne It pr th c I o n4y a "q a forester or a landscape architect. CWrVV'kQL e�Ar,\ . 7) That special measures be taken to retain as many trees as possible; including but not limited to the adjustment of side yard setback regulations in -accordance with Section 12.10.050 (d) 6 where existing trees would be preserved by adjusting the allowable building area. I recommend that P-6-79 be approved for the following reasons: 1). The proposal is consistent with the Edmonds Policy Plan; 2) It conforms to existing zoning & subdivision regulations; 3) There is no significant adverse environmental impact and a a declaration of non -significance has been issued. 4) It will provide a pedestrian access to Pine Ridge Park; 5) It will give the City tree -cutting control on the site. FILE #P-6-79 �0 N V. ALTERNATIVES. i Approval of proposal as submitted with addition of RECOMENDED ALTERNATIVE conditions as stated above. STRENGTH WEAKNESS Will allow development according to Will displace a existin Cit zoning & subdtvision_regT�. ood_eU_-_p_a_r_ M ke-site-an ulations and provide pedestrian access animal habitat. Will increase to Pine Ridge Park with City con Ult7 over tree -cutting on a heavily wooded site. ing aesthetic, drainage and trattic impacts. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDING: There will be certain environmental impacts' but they do not,constitute a significant adverse impact on the environment or-justir-Y an nvironmental Impact statement and a declaration of non -significance has been issued. RECOI-DIENDED MOTION 3) sible. 2 t -confurrms_t_e�* �-�The`rei��-��p onvir-onmeffte-l:--4mp-a-ct-and-a-clA--cla7r&t4-cn J-1 U 44-Zp_xj5T79,Ri, - .� t al 5�1_ it will: 7/78 -3- FILE # P-6-79 MEMO TO: Mary Lou Block, Asst. City Planner Planning Division -FROKM- -Jim Jessel, Manager Parks and Recreation Division SUBJECT: PINE RIDGE ESTATES E �-g�_,nej�Kj_pg epaftteift inkag '-' ''t `AP" —d 'gt .t� �,��6T�Io_p;nentd f_'h-4�e anted between the cul-de-sac e West, eve s,h 't �a z_ -i-an le This easemMF!hoUTd be '8 feet ,wi e a low emergency vehicle access to the park and should e a wooden bollard blocking off undesired vehicl- e access. This new wa lkway would be a valuable'addition to our Pine Ridge Park pedestrian circulation plan. JJ/mw CC: Dan Smith . Engineering Division N� I EDMO14DS PLANNING COKvISSION ':77,' _J �'J979�-o U une�.27' The regular meeting of the Edmonds Planning Commission was called to order" y Chai man John McGibbon at 7:35 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Edmonds Civic Center. Chairr-,an McGibbon welcomed those present. introduced the Staff. and explained the procedure of the meeting. PRESENT ABSENT STAFF PRESENT John McGibbon Valina Walker Fred Ross Floyd E. Smith Keith LaBelle Laura Hall John Hodgin Katherine Allen, Ex officio APPROVAL OF MINUTES Mary Lou Block, Asst. City Planner John LaTourelle, Commun. Devel. Dir. Richard Pearson, Code Rev. Proj. Mgr. Felix Reisner., Consultant Jim Adams, Asst. City Engine * er Larry Martin, City Attorney Jackie Parrett, Deputy City Clerk Minutes of the meeting of June 13, 1979 had been distributed. COMMISSIONER ROSS MOVED, SECONDED BY COM1,11SSIONER SMITH, TO APPROVE THE MINUTES -OF JUNE 13, 1979. MOTION CARRIED. COM"'ISSIONER SMITH MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HALL TO MOVE PRD-1-78 TO THE SECOND POSITION ON THE REGULAR AGENDA. FOLLOWING P-6-79. MOTION CARRIED. Ms. Block advised, regarding R-4-79 that a declaration of significance had been issued indicating there is a potential environmental impact, so an EIS will be required. She suggested this iter. be continued to a date uncertain. CO�V.ISSIONER SMITH MOVED, SECONDED BY COMXISSIONIER ROSS, TO CONTINUE R-4-79 TO A DATE UNCERTAIN TO ALLOW FOP, THE SUBMISSION OF AN EIS. MOTION CARRIED. Ms. Block showed slides of this site which is heavily wooded and has some changes in topography. The west side of the site is level. Pine Ridge Park is south of the site and the other surrounding area is RS-8. The proposed street within the site will be designated 84th Pl. W. The site tncludes 4.1 acres with a cul-de-sac access. The drainage Is a concern and —wi-11-require extens�ive-planning-;----Traffic-in the area -will- increase by-136------- 170 auto trips daily. Ms. Block felt a standard development, rather than a PRO, was preferable for this site because the surrounding areas were developed as single family homes and there are no particularly sensitive issues regarding this site. The site plan was displayed, all.the lots being well over 8,000 sq. ft. Those lots bordered by 84th Ave. W. will require a front ard setback on 84th Ave. W. as well as on the cul-de-sac. y side,�,yae �set ,pR-,_tha..rreii�seffie An alternate street design suggested by the Engineering firm would include planter islands down the center of the road with existing trees remaining in those -islands., Asst. City Engineer Jim Adams reviewed the Engineering requirements and said he saw no reason for difficulty in complying with drainage requirements. --.Ms. Block recommended approval with the.following conditions: (1) THAT THREE PLANTER ISLANDS BE PROVIDED -IN THE CENTER,OF THE CUL4E-SAC, BEING LOCATED TO INCLUDE EXISTING TREES IF POSSIBLE, AND THE REMAINDER OF THE ISLANDS BEING PLANTED WITH LANDSCAPE MATERIALS TO BEMAINTAINED BY THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS. (2) THAT THE PLANTER STRIP ADJACENT TO THE - STREET BE INCLUDED ON THE EAST AND WEST SIDE OF 84TH PL. W. (rJ�-_T#M-7_"W8=MW 4ROWj'HE--I MPROVED-_P0RTI0N-.0R;THE. RQAD1SOUTK�JQJP1NE- RI DGE'_ PARK.., (6) THAT TREES ON_Li_6Ei'_9EM(k6�ITH THE'6PRESS APPROVAL OF iHE CITY PL4MER AND AFTER INSPECTION BY A QUALIFIED EXPERT SUCH AS A FORESTER OR A LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. (7) THAT SPECIAL M EASURES BE TAKEN TO RETAIN AS MANY TREES AS POSSIBLE, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE ADJUSTMENT OF SIDE YARD SETBACK REGULATION'S IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 12.10.050(d)6 WHERE EXISTING TREES WOTULD BE PRESERVED BY ADJUSTING THE ALLOWABLE BUILDING AREA. The reasons given for the approval of P-6-79 were: (1) THE PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT WITH THE EDMONDS POLICY PLAN. (2) THE PROPOSAL CONFORMS TO EXISTING ZONING AND SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS. (3) A DECLARATION OF NONSIGNIFICANT ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT HAD BEEN ISSUED. (4) THE PROPOSAL WILL PROVIDE A PEDESTRIAN ACCESS TO PINE RIDGE PARK. (5) APPROVING THE PROPOSAL WITH THE FOREGOING CONDITIONS WILL GIVE THE CITY TREE -CUTTING CONTROL OF THE SITE. The public portion of the hearing was opened. Mike Miller of Long Brothers Engineering, Inc., said the applicant concurred with the findings and recommendations of the Staff.,-P.��owe.v.er,.-�..he."�felt-7-a.0% #rt 6K e� IT ,e 0.1,wawthed utki 'was, ff—urff u-07 -'bU'rd 1' th -d6v_e p�e�r _He�,saidthe -would-. be. wi l,ttitg7tC-pe6iii'diFe�wil:k�lay,:f ron. - whererthey-"it,�_,o . .y r.t�g,2park�p He asked for clarification on the tree cutting, and Ms. Block advised him that a tree cutting plan is required and the City will want assurance that the remaining trees are healthy. Bob Schillberg, attorney representing some of the nearby landowners, said they were concerned - regarding the availability of services as there currently was only a.4" water line on 202nd and water pressure was low. He felt,that to draw an 8" line from a 4" line would be a problem. He also expressed concern about drainage and said tries should be retained. aNeipfelt,;�-t.he%ma*kwayri:dev,�M t-goodt-but, - tha . t`fit`� �sproposedgotng'7do�ih__the s.teepes.,t-,.pArt�-1,AfF,-tbez site-,v4ar.dr hellst4�e- rk proper,ty.jnstead:o priyat propert" s Cheryl Lacher of 8704 202nd S.W. expressWconcern about the traffic on 202nd, and she felt additional traffic signage was needed. She was advised to contact Mr. Adams and he would discuss this with her. Craig Hillis of 8507 204th S.W. said the zoning on the 204th St. side is RS-12. Gail Cardwell of 8301 203rd Pl. S.W. said they would like somebody from the City to be present when the trees are cut to enforce the City's tree -cutting restrictions. Jerry Swanson of 8308 203rd Pl. S.W. was concerned about drainage as he already had a drainage problem, and another lady added that drywells would not do the job. Mr. Adams advised those present that the City was in the process of replacing all 4" mains and, in addition, a loop w?uld be required from 202nd to 204th which should increase ability for f i r e p r o t e c t I o n I n t h e a r e a . -. if #!T s41-d-�t h i si-i d e v e�to pffieWn t7w"FtTr- b;� f fiFik --t W sj:tua,t-i,orrratt�er—fKar—r-b-OF--iiifr-i'm#ntal'..-Regard.ing:--the,.wa.lkwayi7.be said -the C#p: req0res�tha17 when5s ome body - bu ii ds� next-, to_� a- pu bl i.c. 0 g h ts- of -%-iaX-.,,h mus,t'-devel-op'ono-ha-If�,of7-the str C.,�-,but-_'in_'this case -a stre t, o-uld: ee i� . Vi serve '4ri_-'11t,tl,e:,pu r� pose; -s e-r-v fn§.�6n ly-one:--totaF sw the- St'af V; f #Tv �.a:,Lwa.l kwaA;-- swo7UT&-be morefao' t:e2- an.-pu ting.An:,ar�., t ha.1f:-street.% tHe.notedtth.&t-_.thevv K-e-s-M-M-Err—ainage Ordinance had only been in effect about two years and each of these new -dey-e��6ptti-efft-t-t-ett-e-rs-tKi�-�y�ai-na-gc-s-ituati-on-bec,aus-e-of-ttye-current-requi-rementb. He outlined some of the requirements, noting that as a minimum the rate of runoff must be no faster than It was before the development, a drainage plan is required with all calculations showing how the increased runoff will be taken care of, the plan is checked to assure it meets all requirements and. prior to any construction being done, a temporary erosion plan is required-. Regarding tree cutting. Community Development Director John LaTourelle adv ' ised that his Staff will go out at the start of construction and, based on the plan. will require that the developer red -flag the significant trees on the property and indicate which trees are to be cut and which are not. He also said that the City will be happy to make available to the neighbors the plans that are submitted so they can review them before construction. wje..rar4.wSwansonpsaidwtheiLwdt�kw&OMtw-e-e-n-zgotstADvantimli)mshntrad EDMONDS PLANNING COMMISSION.- 0- & -4between Lot ,,an 1 9,s ran d -- helaop.1,tcant� lAe_yasaq,r�ea�l!z;�or _ & .� , pj _1tha c Gail Cardwell inqui-i�ed whot*,r�"the hJ� b 7 _ - r �a sa, sti edz 61d ac er s 6ff c e o u ally look at the property when the'plan is submi tted, and Mr. Adams said the Drainage Engineer checks each independently, going out and looking at the property. The public portion of the hearing was closed. 0 Commissioner Hall asked whether a PRO development would help the erosion problem by clustering of the units. Ms. Block responded that the Engineering Division appeared to be satisfied that the drainage could be taken care of properly, and when a PRO is suggested it often has a townhouse configuration which the neighbors are unhappy about because they feel townhouses are ' multi -family. Commissioner Smith said he thought the plan was good and he was confident the drainaae could.be taken care of satisfactorily. trHe vWrLd-e'dFtta,,,tCttieEwa_lkNoyIWou.1d�be::V6tt'i7r*-To-eFt-id7ti70fw-i�e—w-t:-ot:t�-9��nd.7-1�W-thary -b'f ViA —eeh!�-1 Ora nd,,,)-;]§ Commissioner Hall suggested to those concerned neighbors that they be present when they hear the bull.dozers go in and start taking out the trees. COM14ISSIONER SMITH THEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER ROSS, THAT P-6-79 BE APPROVED WITH THE CONDITIONS AND FOR THE REASONS GIVEN J-TW-THE- -� THAT' THEiTHE- -8 ` WAt:ICWA% WMS�-BLOCK-,-Ilv HER PRESENTATI-W' WJ-J. .--'EXCEPTION EN;,LOTS, %.AND- 10; --RATHER-. J T_SJ_ t'k J).; L..,UL2,,114_ILLBE-,BETWE T HAN, B ETWEEN - V, V. NO, MMTSN�CAakft[h t6ffF-;Tssi6ner L4RrJTe`was not present for this vote, arriving shorttrTff"e'r" it was taken. A short recess was announced following this, hearing. PRD-1-78 "WISPY WILLOWS" LONG BROTHERS ENGINEERING - Request -to extend the preliminary approval given June 27, 1978 by the Cify—Council for an 11-unit PRO located on 80th Ave. W. on the north side of 212th St. S.W. (RS-6) The letter requesting extension was received from Long Brothers Engineering, Inc. on behalf of Gillespie Construction. Such extensions are provided by Section 12.10.090 of the Zoning Code * � There was no discussion. The hearin.- was opened to the public, no one wished to speak, and the the public portion was closed. COKMISSIONER HALL MOVED, SECONDED BY COMM.ISSIONER LaBELLE. TO APPROVE THE EXTENSION OF THE PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF PRD-1-78. MOTION CARRIED. CR-1-79 Recodification of elements of Edmonds City Code pertaining to land use regulation, including: Title 12. Zoning and Platting; Title 7, Streets and Sidewalks; Title 6, Public Services and Utilities; Title 10, Fire; Title 11, Buildings; and Title 20. Sign Code. C6-m-n6n-ify-C�iv-el-6-pii-ent7D-i-i�-ec—t6i�-J-oh--n—LaTo-u—rell-e rev_i_6�_ed_iri�timmary the proposed Community Development Code which will be developed in two phases. A draft of 'the first phase had been provided the Commissioners. This will incorporate procedural changes, including the hearing examiner system. as well as a general reorganization and rewriting of land use policies and regulations. Felix Reisner reviewed the hearing examiner concept for the Commissioners. It was agreed that the material provided was too lengthy to—st-udy--ttfis evening, so a special work session was scheduleG Tor_J_uTyT9`— for the discussion of CR-1-79. There was no further business to come before the Commission. and the meeting was adjourned at 10:05 p.m. EDMONDS PLANNING COMMISSION. ordinances they were suggesting would allow that * He said the Notice of Intent document requires that any future expansion will be as shown on the drawing attached (Exhibit C) and It is indicated on that drawing that the future tanks would be in the low area. Mr. Phillips said they do not intend to expand in the near future. but the possibility could come in the future so the provision was made. Connection of sewers was discussed. and Mr. Phillips said it would not be practical for thw7small amount they have and. in addition, the City's system would not accommodate th� type of sewage they would have. Councilman Nordquist noted that -the Health Department had - indicated that Union Oil's septic system was one of the best.*and best maintained. that they had ever seen. Bob Wohnnann of Union Oil discussed the water system. Councilman Gould asked for a clarification of paragraph 18 having to do with oil spillage and release of responsibility. Mr. Phillips said Union Oil would do every- thing possible to clean up any oil spill but'would not pay any damages. COUNCILMAN MOTION: -CARNS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN NAUGHTEN, THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ACCEPT THE PROPOSED ANNEXATION; THAT THE CITY COUNCIL WILL REQUIRE THE ADOPTION OF ZONING FOR THE PROPOSED AREA IN SUBSTANTIAL COMPLIANCE WITH THE PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AS ADOPTED BY.SECTTON 12.04.090 OF THE EDMONDS ZONING CODE AND IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE NOTICE OF INTENTION TO COMMENCE ANNEXATION PRO- CEEDINGS; THAT THE CITY COUNCIL WILL REQUIRE THE ASSUMPTION OF EXISTING CITY INDEBTED NESS BY THE AREA TO BE ANNEXED; AND THE CITY COUNCIL WILL AGREE TO THE FULFILLMENT OF ANNEXATION ALL THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS CONTAINED IN THE NOTICE OF INTENTION TO COMMENCE PROCEEDINGS. Mr. Murphy explained what the follow-up procedures would include if the motion were passed. Public Works Director Fred Herzberg noted that there is a half - street involved that will serve property in Woodway and he hoped to get it determined that Woodway will annex that half -street. THE MOTION THEN CARRIED. PUBLIC TRANSIT SERVICE USE OF SUNSET AVE. AND BELL ST. Mike Christopher of SCPTBA s aid his . staff had met with Public Works personnel regarding the proposed weekend revised routing and two additional alterhatives had been developed. Illustrations of Design Concepts I and 2 were provided to the Council.,but Mr. . Christoffer said that f�om a transit poJnt of view the original proposal was the best. although Design Concept I would satisfy a number of the concepts with which they were attempting to work. Public Works Director Fred Herzberg said,the alterna- tives were presented because they were not sure what the configuration of Sunset Ave. MOTION: would be. COUNCILWOMAN ALLEN FOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN NORDQUIST, TO APPROVE THE PUBLIC TRANSIT'S PROPOSAL FOR THE USE OF SUNSET AVE. AND BELL ST. ON WEEKENDS. MOTION CARRIED. . -PRELIMIIIARY.-APPkOVAL' 8-LOT PLAT1 AT�17729: 72Nb AVE. W. DONALD' VER (0- -79) Assistant City Planner Mary Lou Block displayed a vicinity map and slides of the property ' . noting that this was the south half of a cul-de-sac, the north half recently having been subdivided in almost the same configuration. Details of the proposal were providedAn the Planning Commission minutes of July 11, 1979.m Ms. Block noted that- Lot- 1- could-be.-subd-ivided-further- In -the- future.--There-is--an-exist-ing -house- on Lot 1 which will be made nonconforming because of the street which will be developed on the north side, causing the house to be too close to the road, and a modification was required for that. Lot 7 is a flag lot and on such the front yard must be estab- lished at the time of subdivision, and the northwest side had been designated the front. Side lot lines will be adjusted on Lots 4 and 5 to preserve trees.- Ms. Block recommended approval with the adjusted lot lines as shown on the drawing.; with planting iri--the-p-l-ant-er-s-tr-iVa-lorg--the--front-af--each-bui-lding-area,--ine-lud-ing-two-trees�.-and with the modification on Lot 1; because the proposal was consistent with the Edmonds Policy Plan, conforms to existing zoning with the one exception as noted. and because it was consistent with the subdivision to the north. A declaration of no significant MOT I ON adverse impact had been issued. COUNCILWOMAN ALLEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN NORDQUIST. TO GIVE PRELIMINARY -APPROVAL TO P-5-79 WITH THE MODIFICATION ON LOT I AND ACCEPTING- THE PLANNING- STAFF RECOMMENDAT IONS. MOTION CARRIED. Counci.1man Herb did not take part in any of the foregoing actions, arriving at this point: in the agenda at 8:50 p.m. This site is northwest 6f Pine Ridge Park. Assistant City Pianner.Mary Lou Block showed slides of the site noting that there is substantial slope,on the east side of 0— __C the property. The surrounding area is generally RS-8, with some RS-12 in the neigh- borhood. Details of the proposal were provided in the Planning Commission minutes. Ms. Block stated approximately 60% of the trees would be removed for buildings and roads and the Engineering Department was satisified that drainage could be handled adequately to avoid problems for nearby property owners. She said the tapography and site conditions did not justify development of this site as a PRO. She �ecommended approval with the following conditions: (1) That three planter isl*ands be provided in the center of the cul-de-sac, being located to include existing trees if possible, and the remainder of the Islands being planted with landscape materials to be main- tained by the adjacent property owners; (2) That the planter strip,adjacent-to,the �treet be included on the east and west side of 84th Pl. W. ; (IfTtiat- an V -Via4# "d- *t_1`_ ' -'- " b_'_' 'ibl.Ii6e4_,bet_�eW16tS 9-a-nd�-10 to be surfaiced- and outfitte&) pe Les rian-easement e,es.t4 4ft _' 8' P -with tKee �-j w ! x e'd `fe with a -Tockabli.w6o6d, bollard;- 141 That the'.'O'de 'jj`k'-j�'j'_n -a-n&'ce6ne I Y, Y easement, between Lots- §'.'and 10'�'(5).' That a-* pedestriiK yalkw be -6nstiucteVa- ong A i, � . I -'the west-side-of.84th Ave. W=. fror6'the impirovea...,pbrtion of-t1fi-road south. to- Pini��. .� 0 - pi 6�_aFo_(_thi_ Cfi�_ "(6) ov�d- Ith'thE ex ress ap r Ridg&,_,Pi_rky- `ThattFe_�i�olly_bii-F&i� W after inspection by a qualified expert such as a forester or a landscape architect; (7) That special measures be taken to retain as many trees as possible. including but not limited to the adjustment of side yard setback regulations in accordance with Section 12.10.050(2)(d)6. She said the proposal was consis * tent with the Edmonds Policy Plan; it conformed to existing zoning and subdivision regulations; a declaration of nonsignificant adverse environmental impact had been issued. the proposal would provide a pedestrian access to Pine Ridge Park; and approving the proposal with the stated conditions would give the City tree -cutting control of the site. Councilman Carns noted that the City probably would end up maintaining the planter islands so plants placed there should be easily maintained.. Councilman Gould was concerned with the drainage of the site and City Engineer Jim Adams said there ii a drainage problem in -this area but this development would not increase that problem. and it probably would not decrease it either. Mrs. Robert Lacher of 8707 202nd S.W. said there are a lot of children on 202nd, and 84th is a small street in poor repair where teenagers speed. _SHe presented a petition asking for stop signs at 88th/202nd and a posted speed limit of 20 mph. She also noted that in addition to these new homes there are ten others in the same area. Bob Schillberg, attorney rep�esenting some of the adjoining property owners, recommended that either the Council make -a specific requirement that drainage plans go back to the Council before approval. or at teast give the affected property owners a copy of the proposed plans In sufficient time to have them examined by engineers before construction and to afford them an opportunity for input. Mr. Adams said they previously had agreed to give Mr. Schillberg a copy of the plan for study, and between their engineers and the City's, a satisfactory drainage plan should be developed. Mr. Schillberg also asked.that the.neighbors.be given the opportunity to see the tree -cutting plan."'-He'.fel't -thd, 5' oeavelwflkway� -a-long5,,ttie'lback-��of,-th6-.--I'ots"bfi--the-vii!tt-ftidi�of.'64fh-.sSduld-bi�-elim'i'na,tid.'for the%)I, `sfde-6f-- h '64..-thd: feonf-17 t os4-1oiIX offe also called attention to the water suppl�, noting that this development will have an 8"_ water- I ine- fed- by-a-4'-'-I-ine--and.-feeding-into-a-4"—I-ine.—He-fel-t-thi-s-may-cause—.-- additional water pressure problems In the area where they already are experiencing such. Mr. Herzberg responded that they are currently working on a plan to upgrade all water lines to 8", but it will take time. probably falling within a five_- __-- �ygA.K__ _ time frame. -4-efr7yKS �ang ths --,th:- �wa k- 6� 84,t1vbd--eli'ffiiWY6e�ft A and also would increase possibi He felt it Vd'"ufd*1n?wro_�9e drainage problem 1*0es o vandalism. The representative of Long Brothers Engineers, engineers for th� project. —sa4d-4_t-wa-s--the-i-r-i ntervt-i on -to- pl a ce- a-d i-tch-bes.i de -the- wa.1 kway-to- ca tch-a-l-l-of- the — runoff. Carol Ellington of 2023 186th W. said that whenever they ask for road improvements they are told they cannot be done until storm sewers and larger water lines are In. so she asked how they could put In the roads here without those. Councilman Carns explained what the Drainage Ordinance requires regarding retention of water on the site.- Dick Osterhalt. the developer. said they planned to save every tree Dossible. and the more trees tha.t-they-sAxe-the Us _water_runo!t_tberA_wx1J b 'S'6c't-e'sl$-rv?Vy-aeverdpe'do'p-?- — - -17iiieiWi7�iFtffi?"f-h-em--o?f'Ttringent tree- opert ",D mWeiF11H cutting program in existence. He noted ' that at the Planning Commission meeting it had been pointed out. regarding the water main, that it would improve the pressure on 202nd until the lines are Improved. He said they would comply with everything recommended by the Council. After further discussion about the walkway on 84th. MOTION: COUNCILMAN. CARNS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN GOULD, TO GRANT PRELIMINARY APPROVAL Withdrawn is �AWCva TO P-6-79 AND THAT IT NOT GO TO THE COUNCIL FOR FINAL APPROVAL ON THE CONSENT AGENDA BUT INSTEAD BE SET AS AN AGENDA ITEM. APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING: THAT THE T - HREE PLANTERS BE PLANTED WITH LOW MAINTENANCE PLANTINGS. THAT A DRAINAGI�,PLAN BE SUBMITTED AT LEAST 21 DAYS PRIOR TO THE HEARING BEFORE THE COUNCIL ON FINAt APPROVAL, THAT A TREE -CUTTING PLAN ALSO BE SUBMITTED AT LEAST 21 DAYS PRIOR TO THE HEARING BEFORE THE COUNCIL. THAT THE ATTORNEYS FOR THE NEIGHBORS IN THE AREA ALSO BE GIVEN COPIES OF BOTH aMD.;,-T-ttAT-THE-;�GMVEI�ZWALKWAT�--.,.ON,78'4TH-S'E�-.';-'E'L-,-T-M-l�'Nkfi�b,-�t.kOI4�',THE-�F-PROPOSALIP Councilwoman Allen t the walkway was going to I ha I ppen, whether installed by the developer or whether developed informally by people walking that area, and she preferred that the City have a say as to where it would be. She felt that walkways that just happen Increase the drainage problem. k&� � - PO gainsP§ -j.nc:Ius.-ioiy_qf_- tht�-%Mlkway_, sat&:.ther6.-,a0j =Sei_Cefl'- `p�a thways-' the re:-'now'� 0 th-whfich-, th6y'_1Z ,,ha'dt,lived,'-foi-i'severa,l�-lyearS-,anC-the-,,children, wander, through y- bd-t—t Wiy-- diit, not, wa nt�.0_fnvfte more- w.ith-:a. 5!n, grave L-wa I kwa-Y. Communi ty Development Director John LaTourelle sa4 Mis office �ad agreed to give the neighbors the oppor- tunity to review the tree -cutting and drainage plans, but if the Council asked for them 21 days before final approval the improvements would all have been installed. It was determined that the neighbors or their attorney would be given the information prior to construction of the drainage or cutting of trees. Mr. Osterhalt said, however. that they would have to clear the area for the street right-of-way before the lots could be marked. COUNCILMAN CARNS STATED THE MOTION WOULD ACCEPT THE RIGHT- OF-WAY CLEARING, AND THE SECOND AGREED. Councilman Carns then decided to restate his motion. THEREFORE, COUNCILMAN CARNS WITHDREW THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR, ANDTHE SECOND MOTION: ALSO WAS WITHDRAWN. 'COUNCILMAN CARNS THEN MOVED. SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN HERB- THAT AT LEAST 21 DAYS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION OF THE DRAINAGE OR CUTTING OF THE TREH THE ATTORNEY FOR THE NEIGHBORS WILL BE GIVEN THE DRAINAGE PLAN AND THE TREE -CUTTING PLAN AND CITY STAFF APPROVAL ALSO WILL BE REQUIRED. ANY QUESTION WILL GO BACK TO THE COUNCIL PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. Wkj.KEgTjVT ROR E-D--GRA-V.Ek--WAt.KWAY��-lotizTTHE-,tEArST-SID6 ._WP Os -,THE OF, -�DEVELOPMEN,T-WItL-�-BE-�.-PELETED--tk��"7-�TO�.7�,PLMS;:�MOz-OTHER,CONDI.T.IONS STATED_,.BYrT1i ASS) BE,�At�CE. I.- -_ - _ I PTE5. cMOT-LON-CARRIEW�'COU�C11W' GWCC�THEN MOVED TO PLACE ON THE SEPTEMBER 4. 1979 AGENDA A__R_EPO�RT_ANO DISCUSSION ON THE TRAFFIC - a-'_ PROBLEMS AT 84TH AND 202ND. COUNCILMAN NORDQUIST SECONDED THE MOTION. MO?ION CARRIED. HEARING ON P.C. RESOLUTION 630, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF SHORELINES PERMIT TO IMPROVE SOUTH M_ - 9 Assistant City Planner Mary Lou Block said this plan was consistent with the Shoreline Master Program urban designation and conformed to the Policy Plan and the Commercial Waterfront designation in the Edmonds Land Use Guidelines. A declaration of no. significant adverse environmental impact had been issued. Approval was recommended and Ms. Block stated that access to the beach was an important consideration. The public portion of the hearing was opened. Fremont Case of 1411 8th Aye. N. said there is a parking problem at the Center and 14 additional stalls could be put n-the-- concrete-s-lab area-, sloping them toward the beach for drainage_.__ He did not see a the purpose of breaking up the concrete and making a sand dune in its place. He said only one parking space would be lost to get access to 14 more. Public Works Director Fred Herzberg responded that the Policy Plan states there will be no parking within 60' of the bulkhead. The public portion of the hearing was then. closed. COL94CILMAN MOTION: NAUGHTEN MOVED. SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN KASPER, TO APPROVE SM-4-79 AS SUBMITTED. Councilman Carns agreed with Mr. Case that there Is a parking problem and hi questioned —the-parking-restriction-stated-by-Mr-Hti-zb-efl.—C-6ifi�n-i-ti-D-i-i-el'6-pm—eiit-6ir—ecfor John LaTourelle said the policy throughout the entire State of Washington is t hat everything will. be done to prevent waterfront parking lots, and he stated he thought that was a good policy. THE MOTION THEN CARRIED. DISCUSSION ITEMS: WATERFRONT PARKING- WATERFRONT TRAFFIC; ACQUISITION OF AMTRAK EN JOR CITIZEN WALKWAY City Engineer Jim Adams displayed two traffic plans for Railroad Aye.. recommending Plan B Which was one-way north from Dayton to Main and requiring a right turn onto Main from Railroad. There would be a bus island at Railroad and Main where the bus would turn right. The island would facilitate bus turns. eliminating the possibility of unseen small cars which are hazards for buses turning right. Mike Christopher of SCPTBA said he had been working with the Public Works Department and although the plan may not be ideal, there were trade-offs. Bob Morrison of 250 Beach Pl. asked FD GIM14�QUNW MkiNiffl, Me MEMO TO: Harve H.- Harrison Mayor —f-ROM-:--�-Ma ry-�L-ou—B I oc k Planning Director SUBJECT: , APPROVAL OF FINAL 17 LOT PLAT OF PINE RIDGE -ESTATES (P-6-79/BELT) j v is J,o n �wi rml hjjs-i��sgbd * V — Jh d J .�e.m pre I a Amj na ry,,Ip 4.14J. .4420, _p )vg- --by"W "U' 1-� 19.7 9 Attached is a copy of the pYat, a vicinity map . g and" P minutes of the August 21, 1979 City Council meeting. The applicant has complied with all the required conditions. The Planning and Engineering Departments recommend final approval of this plat. iRa- DB/mt attachments City Clerk 'date THESE MINUTES SUBJECT ,.TO DECEMBER 22 APPROVAL EDMDNDS'CITY COUNCIL MINUTES The regular meeting of the Edmonds City Council was called to order at 7:35 p.m. by Mayor Harve Harrison in the Council Chambers of the Edmonds Civic Center. All present joined in the flag salute. PRESENT ABSENT STAFF PRESENT Harve Harrison, Mayor Marc Gluth. Jack Mitchell, Public Works Supt. atherine-Allen —Student-Rep.—Jim-Adams.-Ci.ty-Enginee. John Nordquist Irene Varney Moran, City Clerk Larry Naughten Mary Lou Block, Planning Director Laura Hall Marlo Foster, Police Chief Ray Gould Jack Weinz, Fire Chief Bill Kasper Jim Jessel, Parks & Recreation Director Jo -Anne Jaech Wayne Tanaka, City Attorney Eames.. City- Attarney Jackie Parrett, Deputy City Clerk CONSENT AGENDA MOTION: Items (C) and (D) were removed from the Consent Agenda. COUNCILMEMBER GOULD MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER HALL, TO APPROVE THE BALANCE OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED. The approved items on the Consent Agenda included the following: (A) Roll call. (B) Approval of Minutes of December 8, 1981. (E) Final acceptance of work by Aldrich A Associates on Dayton St. Park, Phase 1. (F) Adoption of Ordinance 2251 for reduction of right-of-way along 196th S.W., from 90' to 60'. (G) Report on bids opened December 8. 1981 for annual supply of chlorine and award to Jones Chemicals.,Inc. (H) Final acceptance of work by Cobra Construction on Anderson Center improve- ments. (1) Authorization to sell surplus dump truck to Roy Baker of Stanwood, Washington, for $1,800. _ �7_ s a ei_��'_IP-6-49/Belt) jfjjna.1Jj-_rlot plat_�of Pioe-Rid t t AUTHORIZATION TO AWARD BID FOR 1982 DIESEL FUEL REOUIREMENTS TO SOUND OIL CO. Item (C) on Consent Aig—enda Naughten asked several questions about vehicle fuel for the City which were answered by Public Works Superintendent Jack Mitchell. This bid, however. was MOTION: for diesel fuel. COUNCILMEMBER NAUGHTEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER JAECH, TO APPROVE ITEM (C) ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED. AUTHORIZATION TO PURCHASE 1982 CHEVROLET S-10 TO REPLACE UNIT 387, ANIMAL CONTROL VEHICLE LItem (D) on Consent Agenaal Because of the budget situation. Councilmember Naughten thought there should be no vehicle-4urchases and that an attempt should be made to extend the life of the present MOTION: vehicles. THEREFORE, COUNCILMEMBER NAUGHTEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER KASPER, Amended NOT TO APPROVE THE PURCHASE OF THE ANIMAL CONTROL VEHICLE. COUNCILMEMBER GOULD MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER ALLEN, TO INSTRUCT THE -STAFF TO DEDUCT Amendment $10,000 FROM THE AMOUNT THE COUNCIL HAD ASKED THEM TO CUT IN EXPENSES IN ORDER TO MEET THE 1982 BUDGET. THE MOTION TO AMEND CARRIED. THE MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED. THEN CARRIED. La 1c; MARY C. HANSON Z0207 85TH PL. W * N I EDMONDS, WA. 580210 _. " v� i; *,01A, %n LT ..ZY SAN 5WR THE LOMAS & NETTLETON CO. d b"Of —FO�-s -1. ICHARD f'T 100 NORTON 8LDG- Al z ;EATTLE, WA.-981.04 125' f7 'RAINIER t4ORTGAGE CO. v I AARON CEFkUTT1_ "I .PO. BOX C-34040 L -4 Ji iEATTLE WA. 58124 - % .1 f ;a L:7125—f— — - WASHINGTON FEDERAL .1 SAVINGS & LOAN I d 1 14 G,O. ELLINGTON 5 1423 4TH AVE. ftA;q-zp -c EATTLE,WA. $8101 r —7 — — Q( vT 13/ --�I 2 5' I ow 2k Rol 11 32; LO L -121 it Fq1 112 2'—' 322 LOV 7 I 'I t/ .0 7 c! *sLDG SET rB4CK LINE (TY�' TY� _j N� F. 1bD sp (NOT -OPEN) t 1K -PAASOINS .-DELLA CANA0Y 1115 3 ATLANTIC - -S% - t4w 49TH ST. s - ..SEAT TU_ WA - -98134 AWV�m,. ............... Policy 75 California Land Title Association Standard Coverage Policy Form 1973 ice lutuil" tawyers Title Insurdnce Corpordtioni? SUBJECT TO SCHEDULE B AND THE CONDITIONS AND STIPULATIONS HEREOF, LAWYERS TITLE INSURANCE CORPORATION. a Virginia corporation. herein called the Company. insures the insured, as of Date of Policy shown i.n Schedule A, against loss or damage. not exceeding the amount of insurance stated in Schedule A, and costs, attorneys fees and expenses which the Company may become obligated to pay hereunder. sustained or incurred by said insured by reason of: 1. Title to the estate or interest described in Schedule A being vested other than as stated therein; 2. Any defect in or lien or encumbrance on such title: 3. Unmarketability of such title; or 4. Any lack of the ordinary right of an abutting owner for access to at least one physically open street or highway if the land, in fact, abuts upon one or more such streets or highways; and in addition. as to an insured lender only: 5. Invalidity.of the lien of the insured mortgage upon said estate or interest except to the extent -that such invalidity, or claim thereof, arises out of the transaction evidenced by the insured mortgage and is based upon a. usury. or b. any consumer credi t protection or truth in lending law-, 6. Priority ofany lien orencumbrance over the lien ofthe insured mortgage, said mortgage being shown in Schedule B in the order of its priority; or a 7. Invalidity of any assignment of the insured mortgage, provided such assignment is shown in Schedule B. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused this Policy to be signed and sealed, to be valid when countersigned by an authorized officer or agent of the Company, all in accordance with its By -Laws. ---7— 7 - . Lawyers Title Insurance Corporation ----------- % Attest :7 7�7 �7,4e- L�,_ President RA� - �4) 1 W "- Secretary Countersigned. 'V LAWYERS TITLE COMPANY OF-WASHINGTON By Policy No'. 75-00- 220-815 er or A ent Authorized Offic g 061-"75-OM 7117�_ corporation, its -transferee of the estate or 'ul "'11 (lamage sliall nave Deen iurnisneu. interes-t so ac�quired, provided the transferee is provided, however, that failure to notify shall in Failure 'to furnish such proof of loss or the parent or wholly owned subsidiary of no case prejudice the rights of any such insured damage shall terminate any liability of the e)* under this policy unless the Company shalla insured; and in favor of any governm t1W Company under this policy as to such loss or ;jydiced bv such failp.re-And- the. non. _h;,h SCHEDULE A Date of Policy: December 11 , 1985 at 3: 45 p.m. Amount of insurance: $ Policy- No. 75-00-220-815 Order No, A 31987 Charge: S 1. Name of Insured: LA . RRY W. DILLOW AND KAREN K. DILLOW, husband and wife 2. The estate or interest referred*to' herein is at. Date of Policy vested in: THE NAMED INSURED A 3. The estate or interest in the land described herein and which is covered by this policy is a fee. SCHEDULEB 138,000-00 198.00 This policy does not insure against loss or damage, nor against costs, attorneys' fees or expenses, any or all of which arise by reason of those matters shown in Parts I and 11 of this Schedule: _P7kRT_F_ 1. Taxes or assessments which are not shown as existing liens by the records of any taxing authority that levies taxes or assessments on real property or by the public records. Proceedings by a public agency which may result in taxes or assessments, or notices of such proceedings,. whether or not shown bythe records ofsuchagency or by the public records. __7 . A ny-facts,-rights,-interestS-OLclaims which are not shown by the public records but which could be ascertained by an inspection of the land or by making inquiry of persons in possession thereof. 3. Easements, liens or encumbrances, or claims thereof, which are not shown by the publicrecords. 4. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments, or any other facts which a correct survey would disclose, and which are not shown by the public records. 5- (a) Unpatented mining -claims; . (b), reservations or excep t. (c) water rights, claims or title �ions in. pa ents-or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof, to water. .6. Any right, title, interest, estate or easement in land beyond the lines of the area specifically described or referred to in Schedule A, orin abutting streets, roads. which the ordinary right of an abutting owner for avenues; alleys, lanes, ways or waterways, but nothing in this paragraph shall modify or limit the ex ten t to access to a physically open street or highway is insured by this policy. 7. Any law, ordinance or governmental regulation (including but not limited to building and zoning ordinances) restricting or -regulating or prohibiting the occupancy, use or enjoyment of the land, or regulating the character, dimensions or location of any improvement now or hereafter erected on the land, or prohibiting a separation in ownership or a reduction in the dimensions or area of the land, or the effect of any violation of any such law, ordinance or governmental regulation. 8. Rights of eminent domain or governmental rights of police power unless notice of the exercise of such rights appears in the public records. 1�9i-, Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims, or other matters - (a) created, suffered, assumed -or agreed to by the insured claimant;.- (b) not shown by the public records and not otherwise excluded from coverage but known to the.insured claimant eitherat Dateof Policy orat the date such claimant acquired an estateor interest insured by this policy or acquired the insured mortgageand notdisclosed in writing by the insured claimant to the Company prior to the date -claimant; (d) attaching or created subsequent to such insured claimant became an insured hereunder; (c) resulting in no loss or damage to the insured Date of Policy; or (e) resulting in loss or damage which would not have been sustained if the insured claimant had been a purchaser or encumbrancer for value without knowledge. 061-6-075-0002.'. tUf -A S-CiWd—arcF(V&E-7�—) PART 11 1. For additional Easements,. Covenants, Restrictions and .Reservations of Record, see Exhibit B attached., 2. DEED OF TRUSTAND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: Grantor: Larry W. Dillow and Karen K. Dillowl husband and wife Trustee: Lawyers Title Company of Washington, Inc. Beneficiary: Washington Federal Savings and Loan Association of Seattle Original Amount:, $83,000.00, plus interest. Dated: December 9, 1985 Recorded: December 11 , 19,85. Recording No.: 8512110244 Book/Page:- 1938/0285 1. RESERVATIONS AND/OR EXCEPTIONS CONTAINED IN INSTRUMENT: From: Pope & Talbot, Inc., a California Corporation Recorded: October 21, 1955 and February 26, lA7 Recording Nos.: 1165758 and 1226659 As Follows: The Grantor hereby reserves unto itself and unto its successors and assigns, the fullf complete and absolute rights to all oils, gases, coal, fossils, metals and minerals of every name and nature, also sand and gravel in commercial . quantities, which may be in or upon said land or any part thereof with the right of entry upon said land to prospect and explore for and also to take, mine and remove the same provided, said Buyer*, his successors, heirs and assigns, shall be reasonably compensated for all damage done to the surface of said land and the improvements thereon in carrying on of any of such operations. 2. DEDICATION CONTAINED ON THE FACE OF THE PLAT, AS FOLLOWS: The right of the public to make all necessary slopes for cuts or fills upon said premises, in the reasonable grading of all streets, also the right of access over the lots to the utility easements at any time for th.e.stated pruposes, as dedicated in the plat. 3. EASEMENT PROVISION CONTAINED ON THE FACE OF THE PLAT, AS FOLLOWS: A An easement is hereby reserved for and granted to PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT NO. 1 OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY, GENERAL TELEPHONE COMPANY OF THE NORTHWEST, INC., CATV and their 'successors and assigns,, under and upon the exterior 7 feet parallel with and adjoining the street frontage of all lots, in which to install, lay, construct, renew, operate and maintain underground conduits, cable and wires with necessary facilities and other equipment for the purpose of service, together with the right to enter upon the, lots at all times for the purposes stated. The above easement is also reserved for and granted to CITY OF EDMONDS for other undergrourid utilities. 4. COVENANT CONTAINED ON THE FACE OF THE PLAT, AS FOLLOWS: Owners, and all persons having any present or subsequent ownership interest in these lands, and the successors and assigns of owners of other parties having any said interest, hereby -agree that the City of Edmonds shall be held harmless in all respects from. any and whi h may Ue—b-c-casioned now or in the future to adjacent land or improvements by reason of the construction, operation and maintenance of' the drainage system, and hereby waive and release the City of Edmonds from any and all claims for damages excluding damage caused soley by an,act_,_.__-_. omission of -said City and_ Injun'ctive relief which the owners or their successors or assigns, may themselves have now or in the future by reason of the construction, maintenance and operation of said drainage system; also- owners to maintain planter islands. 43/114 SCHEDULE C The land referred to in this Policy is described as fol-lows: Lot 8, PINE RIDGE ESTATES, According to the plat thereof recorded in Volume 43 of Plats, Pages 114 and 115', Records of Snohomish County, Washington. Situate in the County of -Snohomish, State of Washington. ,PATRICK'S a ppralsal SERVICE, INC. 22002 - 64th Ave. W. Suite 2C Mountlake Terrace, Washington 98043 Telephone- 9W) 775-M June 24, 1987 Re: File #288-25 Larry W. & Karen'Dillow 203XX 84th Place West Edmonds, Washington 98020 To Whom It May Concern: ADDENDUM Subject site consists of a pie shaped lot comprised of --appr-ox-i-mate-1-y--1-0-i--000—squa-re—f eet--located--at—tne --end -of a -'quiet cul-de-sac. Owner indicates there is a proposed 10 foot easement along north side of lot for walkway right-of-way and utilities. It is my opinion that this proposed easement could have some minor negative influence on marketability. Exact dollar amount has not been determined at this time. Should you have any further questions, do not hesitate to contact me J r;4mo_ R ames R. Sanders* Appraiser Garr L. Patrick Pres dent/Appraiser EASEMENT i6l Ir a vialuaple consideriation, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the Grantor(s), LARRY W. DILLOW and KAREN K. DILLOW, husband and wife hereby grant—L and conveyl to the Grantee(S), THE CITY OF, EDMONDS their s ssors and assigns, the right, privilege and authorit t construct, improve, repair ucc( it in .:,,and maintain a walkwavleasement Snohomish r\_7 County, State of Washingt I:- , n -fo -r- -A re �3j� across, over an 3 upo' e, fE t of the following land, located in on, to -wit: �',,',Ea6teriy7feet**of Lot 8, Pine Ridge Estates,'according to the plat thereof recorded in volume 43 of Plats', page 114 records of -Snohomish Count)i; Washington. #*Being the Easterly line;of Lot 8 and the Westerly line of Lot 9. Th I p Grantor(s) shall mak no use of the land occupied by said walkway easement -.except for ped�strial foot traffic In exercisin . g.the rights he�ein granted, the Grantee(s), t h eir successors and assigns, may pass and repass over said walkway easement and may cut and re ove brush, t I rees and other obstructions which in the opinion of the Grantee(s) the use-q fn ti e if 6 r e-'( s f t f '- sa i(]* `&��Eiriien t Th ' 6 covenant herein cont ined shall run ivith the land an'd are binding upon all subsequent owners thereof. r In. Witness W ereof, the si id Grantor(s) h-ave executed this instrument this lith day of JUN] 86 L 1) Ti Katbn- K. Dillow STATE OF WA�HINGTON, ',Couniy of ss. (Individual Acknowledgment) N a ry P u ot, blic in and for the State of Washington, .7575i!W� Funell- 17.?.;103 ; residin -at do hcreby certify that on 9 t h i s day of Mr 'A 1 1 _8.6- 1'7 Pr-11- / .1 1 9—, pe�sonally appeared before me Larry W. -Eiillow land Karen K. Dillow "to, me, kno%N-n to e the individuals d e s c r i b e (I i n and who -ithin instrument and executed the acknowle dged that hey signed the sarne as. their 'f ree and voluntary act and d : eed for the uses and pu I rposes ho�rein mentioned. GIVEN UNDERM)'HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL-L-his day of u d for thelState of Washington, residing at Q 1�'-V e Jt in said Countey. Notary P blic in an Helle% tic. ilitA No I I Ao. Nol. 11F. F1,Kom,c1�1 it 11 E OK I N IIA R,r IN A N Y FOR Ni IiATSOEVER- EASEMENT For a valUa le consid 'r ion, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the Grantor(s), It �d KAREN K. DILLOW, husband and wife LARRY W. DILLOW an hereby grant— and conve�, to the Grantee"(s); THE CITY OF EDMONDS their succe sors and as igns, the right, privilege and authorit to cons truct, improve, repair and maintain a walkway asement across, over an6 upon —f o4r_� County, State of-Washingto . n, to -wit: feet of the followipg land, I Oted in Snohomish V I�asterly 7fee", of Lot 8, Pine Ridge Estates, according to the plat thereof recorded -vb -1 ume of Plats', page 114 records of Snohomish Gount)j, Washington. **Being the Ea terly line of Lot: 8 and the West:erly line of Lot 9. 43 s "o) The' Crantor(s shall make no use of the land occupied by said walkwayAeas'enient 146ta except for __pedeptrial footl traffica 1-ie rights he ed, the Grantee(s), t h-eir successors and assigns, may I)t e.xercising.tl rein grant ',,.pass and repass ver said walkwav easement and may,c,ut and.remove brush, t ees and other obstructions which in the opinion of the Grantee(s) inter.ere( �v f t h e * t T—s ii i" d . ..... .. . The covenants herein contained shall run with the land and are binding upon all subsequent owners thereof. In Witness Wh?reof, the sa d Grantor(s) h-ave executed th is instrument this 11th day of JUNE 19i86 L Wag 1) 1, 1 1 W K. DLllow STATE OF WAS, )N 0 �INGTC h ss. (Individual Acknowledgment) County of - Sn mish Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, resid i: 757", SA C/ :3 ng at 1�1� do hereby certify that.on this ditty of pe sonally appeared before me 191 Larry W. �illow and Karen K. Dillow 777- ... . ... .77. to in'e known to e the indivi�uals described in'and who executed the w ith . in i . n L strurne nt and a.cknowledged th t they I si,(_,ned the same as their free and voluntary act and deed for the ises and purposes herein rnentioned. C a, AVEN UNDE MYHAND AND OFFICIAL SE I &iv of 4J—Il is 19 Notary Public in and for the State of Washi,ngton, residing at -,j &V e in said Cot'nt Y. EsitMent 1% ;� n. Legal Hidnk (:j), jj,jj� % tj,. hirm No I "S!Al I KIAI NIANNOT11F ITROPtICIA) HOLE ()K IN PARTIN ANN'FOKKI WIATSOIAT.R. 11� TOM BELT 778-0247 12 776-2829 P 0 BOX 216 LYNNWOOD WA 98036 8/15/87 Mr. & Mrs. Dillow 20310 - 84th Pl. W. Ydmonds, Wa. 98020 Dear Mr. & Mrs. Dillow: We returned the easement for the pedestrian path, which I you had signed, for you to initial to include the watermain easement. At this time you have apparently decided not to return the document. You were told of the easement at the time of the purchase of your house. -- -----Due -to--an -error—the--easement- -was --improper ly recorded -.--To --correct-- -this-, error, without some legal action involving expense and time for all parties involved, we need to have the document returned to me with toue initials. The addition of the easement for the watermain has no effect on the path. When I receive the easement I will redo the path which will improve the site over its present condition. If you or your Attorneys have any questions, please call me. Thanks. Yours truly, Tom Belt cc: Mary Lou Block Planning Director City of Edmonds �i> September 11, 1987 Mr. & Mrs. Tom Belt 917 - 9th Ave. N. Edmonds, WA 98020 RE: Proposed Easement on Lot 8, Pine Ridge Estates Dear Tan & Doris: . This letter is in response to your letter dated 8-15-87. In response to paragraph one of your letter, we were not told of a watermain easemnt at the tim- we purchased our hom.. To our knowledge no error has been made. Enclosed you'will find a copy of a letter from Patrick's Appraisal Service, Inc. stating that they feel there would be a negative effect on our property if there was an easement added to our property. They indicated in a previous phone con- versation that minor mans 5-10%, however until research is done to con -pare other —propert ies- -with s imil ar- _e asemnts,,—an -exact _f igure.- has -not-been -determined. -At the very least 5% of our existing appraisal of $152,000 would equal $7,600. However, it is possible that after their research for conparables the percentage could increase. Since you and Rene keep harrassing us about this easemnt, we will agree to offer to let you buy the easemnt from us since you are the ONLY ones that will benefit from it. we feel it is fair that you should pay the value that our property will be de -valued. I hardly think it is fair for you to expect that since we paid you $146,000 for our property that we would allow an easemnt that would de -value our property and make it worth less than we paid for it ($152,000 - $7,600 = $144,400). No one in their right mind would allow such a situation to happen to them and neither will we. We will postpone our plans to build a fence until after October 15, 1987 to allow you tiTne to decide if you want to resolve this easernent issue. If we don't hear from' you by that date, we will consider this matter closed and will begin pltins for construction of our fence on the existing property line. We are tired of being hassled by you and your fanily as well as your tactics at trying to turn our neighbors against us. We will offer you this opportunity to resolve this easemnt issue IF THAT IS YOUR DESIRE. Otherwise, A-- strongly advise that you leave us alone or A--ewill c—ont—act the Edmonds Police Deuartment and file a COrTlaint against you. Our Price for this easemnt is $10,000.00. I'd consider that a bargain considering the rnental anguish you have caused our fan-tily. As you know, nothing is free. If You want it, you can pay for it like we did. If you don't want to pay for it, then -leave us alone. The choice is up to you. Sincerely, �i� Larry & Karen Dillow 20310 - 84th Pl. W. Edmonds, WA 98020 CC: Marylou Block, City of Edmonds W22 "e;k��RM777777M_Z January 19, 1988 Mary Lou Block City of Edmonds 250 - 5th Ave. N. Edmonds, WA 98020 RE: Easement on Lot 9, Pine Ridge Estates Dear Ms. Block: Several weeks ago I had a conversation with Dan in your department. I inquired what the status was with your easement requirement on Lot 9 in Pine Ridge Estates. He told me that he had heard that Tan Belt had a meting with you and the City Attorney and that Tan Belt was "wheeling.and dealing". In December of 1985 we purchased our home which was custom built by Doris Belt.. This was our dream ham and we were very pleased at the finished home. We began putting our lawn in in May of 1986 and that is when all the problems began. Doris Belt, Torn Belt, Diana Van Louvren (aka Diana Belt) and Rene Van Louvren all have harrassed us either by phone, letter or in person regarding this easement. They not only have harrassed us, they are very good friends with the Richard Penns, William Thues, Kurt Larsens and Lewis Garrison who all live on either side of us. Before the easement problems began in May of 1986, we were becoming acquainted with all these people and were starting friendships. We were included in several social gatherings. After the easement problems surfaced, all these social invitations ceased and everyone was at the very least unfriendly. Because they are all good friends with Diana & Rene Van Louvren, they have only heard one side of the story and refuse to hear our side. There have been several occasions when my family was harrassed by these neighbors. These problems as you know have been going on since May of 1986. We have gone from loving our new home to wishing we could mve but can't afford to. This easement problem has created so much stress i - n our li - ves -- and -- eventuall� resulted in our letter to Doris Belt to leave us alone. I have also incurred a medical- condition that is the result of being so upset and unhappy all the time. Unfortunately I will live with -this condition the rest of my life. Besides -the -medical- -problems-that- have - resulted-,--there-are-f-ive-f amil-ies---- - that will never allow us to form a friendship. I am forced to feel uncomfortable and unhappy every tmm I ccme home. Isn't this a wonderful way to feel about a brand new home? The City of Edmonds has obviously reduced the requirement of this easement because the Van Louvrens have erected their fence. I expect an explanation and an apology from your office as to why over 1-1/2 years has gone by and now you have reduced the easement size requirement but you refused to reduce the easement size when Doris Belt presented the easement papers to you in May of 1987? If you could reduce the size in December of 1987, why didn't you reduce the size in May of 1986? 1�1 Letter to Mary Lou Block january 19, 1988 Page-2 0 I hereby request these answers to my questions. Because of YR�r actions in this easemnt matter, it has ruined my life, you have made ii�'bncCnfOrtable for my two innocent children who also live bere and have caused m great physical harm. Ms. Block, you were personally aware Of the harrassmnt we were receiving by the Belts and Van Louvrens because I phoned you soffe tin-P- ago and told you of the situation. Also before a decision to reduce the easemnt size was made, I told Dan what had happened and how it was affecting my fanilY- If the reduction in the easemnt size had been reduced immadiately upon notification of this problem, it would have been resolved and no one would have had reason to be angry and harrass us. This could all have been avoided. Your office has done great harm to my family and I feel the least you can do is to offer an explanation of your actions. I will anxiously await your response. since ely, Karen Dillow 20310 - 84th Pl. W. Edmonds, WA 98020 /kd cc: Peter Hahn . �'w I I CITY OF EDMONDS LARRY S. NAUGHTEN 250 5th AVE. N. * EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 98020 * (206) 771-3202 MAYOR COMMUNITY SERVICES PETER E. HAHN DIRECTOR February 11, 1988 Karen Dillow 20310 - 84th Pl. W. -Edmonds.,--WA --9802.0--.-- SUBJECT: EASEMENT ON LOT 9, PINE RIDGE ESTATES Dear Mrs Dillow: I received your letter in regard to the easement and was surprised to learn that you are unhappy with the outcome. In fact, the final disposition of this situation was, to a large extent, the result of your insistence that no part of the easement was to be located on your property. The originally proposed easement with five feet on Lot 8 and five feet on Lot 9 was acceptable to the City and apparently was what the applicant intended to do when he designed the subdivision. However,. that was not what he recorded. The applicant tried to modify the recorded easement with your cooperation and was, at one point, successful. Subsequently, however, you withdrew your cooperation and the applicant had no way to provide the easement as originally intended. In fact the easement has not been reduced in size. The Belts have been required to obtain a special permit to allow them to construct the fence in that location. Although this is not an ideal situation, it does allow the easement to be maintained, while not infringing upon your property - an action to which you strenuously objected. Although it is unfortunate that you are feeling ostracized by your neighbors, this is not a situation caused by the City, nor is there anything the City can do anything about it., Sincerely, vm�-6� Mary Lou Block Managei�-4 Planning Division cc. City Attorney DILLOW/TXTMLB51, PUBLIC WORKS PLANNING PARKS AND RECREATION ENGINEERING 0 0 CITY OF EDMONDS CIVIC CENTER * EDMONDS, WA 98020 9 (206) 775-2525 .1 8 `*�� q Q$ 9 0 �_ " 9 December 21, 1998 Ms Karen Dillow 20310 - 84th Place*W. Edmonds, WA 98020 LARRY S. NAUGHTEN MAYOR Dear Karen: We've reviewed the file. It's not clear how the walkway got moved from between lots 9 & 10 to between 8 & 9, but the fact does remain that is where it is recorded on the final plat. There may be some things the City can do to mitigate the impact and appear- ance of the walkway. Mr. Bowman will review this situation with our City Attorney and I'll get back to you. It will probably take a couple of weeks with all the holidays. Happy Holidays, CITY OF EDM NDS La eNa /ug jhn Ma 4vnr LSN/jal cc: Duane Bowman KD12/21/TXTMAYOR Incorporated August 11, 1890 Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan N I 0 CITY OF EDMONDS CIVIC CENTER * EDMONDS, WA 98020 - (206) 775-2525 � 8 q 0 - . I q lc� - March 22, 1990 LARRY -S. NAUGHTEN MAYOR . Karen Dillow -------20310--84th -P-lace-West-- Edmonds, WA 98020 Dear Karen: After reviewing the whole issue, the most the City can do is a four foot fence, parallel to your neighbor's fence. Whether you go four feet or six feet, you'll need a permit; also a survey if you don't know your lot line. I'll explain the reason we can't do more when I see you. You should probably get a bid, maybe two. We'll also put in some surface material; probably crushed rock. We won't put in bollards unless it becomes a problem with motorcycles later on. Sincerely, CITY OF EDVONDS ten LSN/db �i� 0 Incorporated August 11. 1890 * Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan May 22,1991 Mayor Larry S. Naughten City of Edmonds 250 - 5th Ave. N. --Edmon §-,-WA--98020--- SUBJECT,., Letter dated March 22,1990 Dear.Mayor Naughten: Enclosed are two fence bids in reference to your letter dated March 22, 1990. I have added the cost figures fora four foot fence versus a six foot fence since the City is, only willing to pay for the four foot fence. My neighbor's fence is a six foot fence and I think it will look terrible not to match the same height since the fences will only be five feet apart from each other. Of the two bids, Economy Fence Center is the lesser of the two. I apologize for taking so long to get these bids. I just recently got around to it. Now that spring is here there is alot more traffic going thru the easement and we really.need to get the fence up. We are anxious to get this issue resolved as soon as possible. Thank you so much for all you did on my behalf. You're great! If you need any further information, please call me at 778-1925. Sincerely, Karen Dillow 20310 - 84th Pl. W. Edmonds, WA 98026 �;-_S--.E. 1/4l N.W. 1/4, SEC. -19, TWP 27 N.1 RGAE., W. CITY OF EDMONDS SNOH.OMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON Af.W CCNqA(Sk PLAr /32 7. N WN .4-Co. 00 00 /Z7.++ In it 3. 14 it .14 �71 I 42.7..�?O Ai 8 1 ox-66" o a' Ar 3, Z I jv 8 .�o At 0 C.'5'1 '3 7*,f 'o S.q . if 0 . t -,a % v /a I . I i - -s Ar 7- A4 O)V IN CASE /V VZqA01AA1: ASSUMAII ';Vw 'e o' --AS 7- -301..; 0? 20�f EPST. .5 W. FE CE INC. -WN-CF-434417 DESIGN& CONSTRUCTION 35 Years of Quality Fencing! Length Height Walk Drive Gate Gate /Z // STYLE (206) 775-0531 (206) 885-3566 PROPOSAL 6410 - 212th S.W. Eastside Lynnwood, WA 98036 0 DATE CUSTOMER RES. Z 7V -A� ADDRESS. 4101 BUS. CITY —ZIP FAX JOB SITE: (— At:i-,O��'/L�' CUSTOMER RESPONSIBLE FOR PERMIT WHERE REQUIRED L)CI Power Available Cedar Grade Concrete To Grade Stairstep Facing Po�t Spacing Set posts only Metal Base PAYMENT IN FULL DUE UPON comPLETION Complete Customer advises and warrants that he/she is either the owner — or agent of the owner — of the property described hereon. im Wire Ga. CUSTOMER ASSUMES FULL RESPONSIBILITY FOR LOCATION OF FENCE and agrees to, at customer's sole expense, defend and hold Town & Country Fence, Inc. harmless respecting claims of encroachment, claims of damage to underground facilities, and/or any other claims brought on account of the work hereinabove described. Barb Wire CUSTOMER AGREES TO PAY FOR SAID FENCE IN FULL UPON COMPLETION. Further, customer acknowledges and agrees that, in the event collection of customer's payment obligation he reunder is placed in the hands of Ten. Wire Ga. an attorney, customer shall pay attorney's fees and court costs thereby necessitated. Terminal Posts APPROVED & ACCEPTED Line Posts Date 19 PRICE Top Rail S. TAX Customer's Signature Underground 0 qjIlities T Yes Y) No Sales Representative ATTN i DAT&Q, FAX r L-5, Specification Chain Link - Wire Gauge Barb Wire Ten. Wire Top Rail — Line Posts - Term Posts Ornamental Iron Fence Height A4 AA Gates I A A( n. V IV, \.7 V Set in Cement 6'\ Approx. Post Spacing Cedar Fence gr)fC:) %_1 N.-e Style [A A r-)i^\ N i Faces To Grade 'Stepped Tearout 9 —Haukkway-S— Poste---:? Rail Size Board Size Picket Size Old Fence Removal —Add to Price — Special Equipment Needed on Job FENCE COMPANY, INC. 16923 48th Ave. W., Lynnwood, WA 98037 FAX SEATTLE LYNNWOOD 745-3660 763-8282 745-8645 EVERETT EASTSIDE 355-4302 481-2074 RIWA I.T J 11V 7 SIGN Both Sides of Contract and RETURN FOR SCHEDULING GENERAL CONDITIONS t. Premises. The customer is responsible for properly informing CITY WIDE FENCE COMPANY, INC. ("CWF") of all property lines, the location of all underground restrictions or underground utilities, easements, right-of-ways, neighborhood and community covenants, prior underground utility work, and other subsoil conditions prior to commencement ofthe work, including the location of any buried pipes, power lines, septic tanks, sprinkler systems, cable TV lines. utility lines, or drain fields. THE CUSTOMER SHOULD CALL 1-800-424-5555 FOR ASSISTANCE IN LOCATING ALL UNDERGROUND UTILITIES. Otherwise, CWF will assume all soil is clean, unobstructed and of good bearing. CWF has no[ made any soil studies and is thus proceeding with the construction on the assumption that the underlying soil or land is suitable for the proposed construction. and no extra excavation or backfill will be required. The determination ofany need for a soil analysis. as well as the cost of the analysis, *shall be paid by the customer. The customer shall establish the finish grade,,tnd clear the area in which the structure is to be installed, ofall obstructions, debris, brush and/or plants prior to the set date. Any portion(s) of the area left uncleared by the customer shall be cleared by CWF's crews on the set date. Unless pre -arranged and included in this contract, the cuslorner shall be charged $35.00 per man/per hour for clearing and/or grading work. The Customer shall place all stakes clearly marking the placement ofall end, corner, and gate posts. (continued on back) Sale PricE Sales Tax TOTAL Down Payment 100% Due Upon Completion HAVE READ AND ACCEPT THE INFORMATION AS STATED IN THE FRONT AND BACK OF THIS CONTRACT - Date *Customer Si ature Salesman Signa :17, E I L ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 50 3 33 3� 120 4-� W. -0 6 202N-6otPL. S. RA A D A*.* 80 2 5 7 4 'T fES1 No. 2 50 3 4 5 6 202 ND ST S. W. 0 60 50 -- 0 13 1 1 17 3 2 6 Ln 202 ND. PL. S.W. . co' 12 14 13 12 Io\ 9 — LLJ 2 —j > 7 ,GRANADA ESTATES < 3 30 15 18 NJ- 19 7PARKS 3 2 OD 16 17 20 21 lo co 4 50 4 2031 50 5 90 C W 9 z so 5 99 w 6 a. LAURI V ANN PARK 0 HE GI 3 4 5 6 7 6 E s 0 z OT OPEN 30 -204TH ST S W 50 2031 90 44 G I' 50 80 7 27 3 60 60 i 15 24 2 34 26 16 25 3 35 ........... 17 26 25 :2 A B c 4 LJ 36 4 : --- Q) co fn .18 27 P I N E RIDGE 'PA 11 5 691! 205 TH PL. s.W 1 2 3 4 5 6 T U 19 20 A B 6 36 DE LONG ADD. r) --- 20 29 -7 39 23 co 21 30 T�3 8 -r -1 40- z (,C) 22 22 9 1 31 S-46-78 (15') 0 oo ----I — 0 0 to % k-L2 3 32 in 10 0207TH S T. S. W. 21 31 41 1/ 2207 ST SW 0 13 6 01 4 20 30 1 30 6 45 44 14 1 2 MAIN ST. 0 sm U. w X 9 8 JORD.,; Z 7 12 90 13 5 14 50 4 Lu 15 < ir 3 cc) 0 02 w 0 0 I 0 0 CITY OF EDMONDS 250 - 5TH AVE. N, - EDMONDS, WA 98020 - (206) 771-3202 COMMUNITY SERVICES: Public Works * Planning * Parks and Recreation * Engineering 890 - I o4 October 17, 1991 Karen Dillow 20310 84th Place Edmonds, WA 98026 Dear Ms. Dillow: Subject: DRAFT "FENCE SETTLEMENT" LARRY S. NALIGHTEN MAYOR PETER E. HAHN DIRECTOR Enclosed for your review is a copy of the draft "fence settlement" which was prepared by the City Attorney. I would appreciate your any comments which you may have to offer on this draft, so that I may schedule this item for the earliest possible Council meeting to finally bring this issue to a resolution. If you should have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me at 771-3202 Sincerely, J?efr/e/y S7. Wilson, AICP Current Planning Supervisor Enclosure DIL-FENC/10-17-9l.CORRES 9 Incorporated August 11, 1890 0 Sister Cities International — Helkinan, Japan �k 0 0 SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT WHEREAS, the undersigned Karen Dillow and Larry W. . Dillow, the owners of.certain property described in this Agreement, have asserted- claims that a public walkway easement was improperly relocated by administrative action of the City of Edmonds to a location immediately adjacent to their residential property, and have asserted that they have been damaged thereby; WHEREAS, the City of Edmonds believes that in all respects it has acted appropriately and in conformance with law with respect to the relocation of the public easement; WHEREAS, both parties, while believing their position to be correct, wish to resolve this matter in accordance with the terms and conditions set forth in this Settlement Agreement, NOW THEREFORE, Larry W. Dillow and Karen Dillow, husband and wife (hereinafter "Owners") and the City of Edmonds, Washington, an optional code municipal corporation (hereinafter 1'cityll)., enter" into this Settlement Agreement under the terms and conditions set forth herein. 1. Consideration of Parties. In consideration of the waivers, release, and hold harmless of the owners set forth herein, the city of Edmonds agrees to pay the sum of ($ 1.Z'Z0.41 ). This amount has been determined and arrived at as the cost of installing a four foot high fence along the boundary of the hereinafter described residential property and a pedestrian walkway 0006.05002H/WSS52088A WSS/mls 02/12/90-1 easement. Upon payment of the aforementioned sum, the obligations of the City of Edmonds shall be and are at an end. 2. Subiect Site. The subject site is located at 20310 84th Place, Edmonds, Washington and is leg ally described as: Lot 8, Pine Ridge Estates according to the plat thereof recorded at Book I Page of the records of Snohomish County, Washington. 3. Construction of Pence. The aforementioned sum has been provided by the City of Edmonds in consideration of the Release, Waiver and Hold Harmless and Indemnity Provisions contained in this Agreement. While calculated upon the cost of constructing a fence adjacent to the public walkway and on the property of the owners, nothing herein shall be interpreted to require the Owners to construct such fence. The Owners are notified that construction of a fence in excess of four feet in height is regulated by the provisions of Chapter 17.30 of the Edmonds Community Development Code. Fences less than four feet in height do not require a permit from the City. A fence in excess of four feet and up to six feet requires the specific approval of the building official. Nothing herein shall be interpreted to exempt the Owners from the restrictions and regulations of the Community Development Code and Chapter 17.30 thereof. 4. Touch and Concern the Land. This Agreement is a covenant which touches and concerns the affected property. At the option of the City of Edmonds it may be recorded. As a covenant, touching and concerning the land, this Agreement shall 0006.05002H/WSS52088A -2- WSS/mls 02/12/90-1 0 9 bind all future owners and successors in interest in the aforementioned subject site. S. Waiver, Release, Hold Harmless and Indemnification Provision. The owners, on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors in interest and assigns, do hereby waive and relinquish any and all claims as hereinafter described and promise to hold harmless and indemnify the City of Edmonds, it's officers, agents and employees from any and all claims of any kind or nature arising from or out of the actions and administrative approvals of the City of Edmonds, it's officers, agents and employees with respect to the location or relocation of a pedestrian walkway easement, public utility easements and the underlying approval of the plat of Pine Ridge Estates which have occurred to the date of execution of this Agreement. This promise to hold harmless and indemnify shall apply to any loss, claim or liability of any kind or nature whether occurring to persons or property and arising as above set forth. 6. Whole Agreement, Amendment. This Agreement constitutes the whole agreement between the parties and is not based on any representation, written or oral not contained within the body of this Agreement. This Agreement shall be amended only upon the express written consent of all the parties hereto. DONE this day of 11 1990. OWNERS: Larry W. Dillow 0006.05002H/WSS52088A -3- WSS/mls 02/12/90-1 0 0 Karen Dillow STATE OF WASHINGTON ) )ss: COUNTY OF I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Larry W. Dillow signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his free and voluntary act for the purposes mentioned in this instrument. DATED this _ day of STATE OF WASHINGTON ) )ss: COUNTY OF r 1990. NOTARY PUBLIC My commission expires: I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Karen Dillow signed this instrument and'acknowledged it to be her free and voluntary act for the pu rposes mentioned in this instrument. DATED this _ day of f 1990. NOTARY PUBLIC My commission expires: THE CITY OF EDMONDS 0006.05002H/WSS52088A -4- WSS/mls 02/12/90-1 Attest/Approved: Jacqueline G. Parrett, City Clerk Approved as to form: City Attorneyo 0006.05002H/WSS52088A -5- WSS/mls 02/12/90-1 0 9 R E C F. I E SEP 3:3 1,991 August 20, 1991 KAMM W-T d MEMO TO: Rob Chave, Manager Planning Division FROM: Larry S. Naughten Mayor SUBJECT: DILLOW BOUNDARY FENCE SETTLEMENT The attached matter needs to be put on a City Council Agenda for approval. As per Scott Snyder's memo of 8/14/91, the fence cost and date need to be inserted in the Settlement Agreement. The original of the agreement is in the City Clerk's Office. FAM4 LN Attachments cc: City Clerk 9 August 20, 1991 MEMO TO: Rob Chave, Manager Planning Division FROM: Larry S. Naughten Mayor SUBJECT: DILLOW BOUNDARY FENCE SETTLEMENT The attached matter needs to be put on a City Council Agenda for approval. As per Scott Snyder's memo of 8/14/91, the fence cost and date need to be inserted in the Settlement Agreement. The original of the agreement is in the City Clerk's Office. LN Attachments cc: City Clerk 9 N1- P 0�47 1 890 . I C) 9 DATE: CITY OF EDMONDS OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY 447-7000 FAX: 447-2015 August 14, 1991 RECEIVED AUG 15 jq�j LARRY S. NALIGHTEN MAYOR TO: Mayor Naughten FROM: W. Scott Snyder, Office of the City Attorneyp-),�- RE: Karen Dillow Dia f ound a Settlement Agreement which I ' previously had drafted. After our conversation, it appears all that needs to be done is to plug in her estimate of the fence cost and place it on the next available Council agenda. Please note that because of the amount of time that has passed, the 1990 date needs to be changed to 1991 and the book and page number plugged in on page 2. The Dillows should supply that information. WSS/klt WSS53530M/0006.050.002H 2100 Westlake Center Tower, 1601 Fifth Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101-1686 Incorporated August 11, 1890 RECEIVED Nil, 3 19 91 May 22, 1991 Lxecubye Offices, Mayor Larry S. Naughten City of Edmonds 250 - 5th Ave. N. Edmonds, WA 98020 SUBJEC11. Letter dated AL%-ch 22,1990 Dear Mayor Naughten: Enclosed are two fence bids in reference to your letter dat Ma 2�, 1990. I have added the cost figures for a four foot fence versus a ix foo since the City is only willing to pay for the four foot fence. My neighbor's fence is a six foot fence and I think it will look terrible not to match the same height since the fences will only be five feet apart from each other. Of the two bid two. I apologize for taking so long to get these bids. I just recently got around to it. Now that spring is here there is alot more traffic going thru the easement and we really need to get the fence up. We are anxious to get this issue resolved as soon as possible. Thank you so much for all you did on my behalf You have been wonderful! If you need any further information, please call. me at 778-1925. Sincerely, ren Dillow 20310 - 84th Pl. W. Edmonds, WA 98026 Enclosures Ecogy Fence Center, Inc. OLI 13325 Lake Road Lynnwood, WA 98037-1619 SET DATE POWER AVAILABLE? CREW WATER AVAILABLE7 Everett: 347-1355 COMPLETE ON ANIMALS ON SITE? 0 YES >r!U C ;, GREW DUST TO MEET CREW7 *f3:YES El NC Seattle: 447-1536 SALES REP W/CREW? 0 YES 9KKTJ Eastside: 881-0884 AWASHINGTON CORPORATION EC-ON-OF-C148DF >9 Everett347-1355 Seattle447-1536 0 EastsideB81-0884 SALESPERSON CALL GARY WELBORN TO SCHEDULE YOUR INSTALLATION DATE(S). U 0 S B T 0 S M I T E e,-?c E PHONE NUMBERS: HOME 77"1 -Iq 79� WORK COUNTY, PAGE S11 GRIDF-�Z LOCATE NO. DEPOSIT RECEIVED 0 YES 0 NO UNDERGROUND UTILITIES LOCATED ON AT AM/PM INSIDE CITY LIMITS? 0 YES El NO LENGTH I HT STYLE 37/ Am C E D A R WALK GATE I tV (j DOUBLE DRIVE AM GATE POSTS WYtfj)�_ OTHER POSTS lqy6l�f POST SPACING12 I' I BOARD SIZE GRADE FACING IV (�-C 0 A5NTO U R STAIR -STEP EXTRA -TIGHT AIR -LINE CHAIN LINK WALK GATE A] (j DOUBLE DRIVE S L I 0 E R T P T GATE POSTS G A E 0 S S A T A M E GATE FRAME G E R T E R M p 0 ST S P TS LINE POSTS LI N E 0 S ]SLIDER P R A TOP RAIL T 0 I L POST SPACING FABRIC GALIG FABRIC COLOR SLATS FACING BARBED WIRE TENSION WIRE BRACE TRUSS CONCRETE AGREEMENT BETWEEN OWNER AND CONTRACTOR I I y'ou' r 'Be' t te, r Bu, s i In es s B'u re, a�u 448-E; 2' , J- t-1 -1-1 -1 - I c ontractors License Information - 1 800-647-202982 Ij 'Fl- I I J _� 1 1. -1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Now- *PLEASE Jj � I I I. -I I- I I- I__I SEE TERMS AND CONDITIONS ON REVERSE,Irl �'l 1 -1 ............... I I 1OWNER FY �hN I C3 COMPLETE INSTALLATION 0 SET& SUPPLY 0 MATERIALS ONLY 0 DAMAGE REPAIR 0 OTHER COST- Q03, 35' URE S TO BE INSTALLED 0' E A4 A LEFT UNCLEARED S - T To NLES'S PRE -ARRANGED AND RING AND/OR GRADING WORK OFALL END, CORN ER YA KNOWS THE ACTUAL; 312ro PC?, WSST: TOTAL: 13)7,43 APPROVED AND A-.GgPRetY7-_' 420. �9 (OWNER) SPOUSE: - (IF MARRIED, BOTH HUSBAND AND WIFE MUST SIGNi CUSTOMER I LL DATE,��— Phone (H) FAX (W)- JOB D SS... 10 — (;�4—f -i� ITY = 0 (2Z RY-� A4AX)AAk-7AP C' DE BILLING ADDRESS ATTN: Specification Chain Link Wire Gauge Barb Wi TernL. Wi Top Rail Line Posts Term Posts Gates Concrete Post Spacing Cl- IAAA�l Cedar Fence 'I Q:6L r style —ern,-3—A7T- Faces 'I t�) — To Grade VIOA 2J44 A 'Post size -4')� I ( , Rail Size 7� -'/ tj1' Board Size---4i( I N -T Picket Size Special Equipment Needed on Job Res. El Com. El —00 V4-D- L >i 0 C -�C LKEM) �Cfly vwrlk� FENCE COMPANY, INC. 763-8282 — 775-9732 16923 48th Avenue West Lynnwood, WA 98037 BONDEDANDINSURED Contractors #CITYWFC1 2 1. N9 -r--j K-q-21 a p -Z- A y T— GN Both Sides of Contract and RETURN FOR SCRIEDULING Your friendship and patronage are important to us and we want youlu-�C' that we are here to do all we can to insure your complete a'ti c i n. s 09 11fi r City Wide Fence Co., Inc. will warranty the workmanship an Material to, stay structurally sound under normal conditions for a period or ---, YOU NEED TO CALL 1-800-424-5555 and ask to have your underground. utility Marked. Sale Price Sales Tax TOTAL Down Payment ,r-+-1 r%..- I I -- I HAVE READ AND ACCEPT THE INFORMATIOV'AS STATED ON THE FRONT AND BACK OF THIS CONTRACT Date Initial Customer Signat�r�e Back A I a CITY OF EDMONDS CIVIC CENTER - EDMONDS, WA 98020 - (206) 775-2525 1 8 9 0 - 1 99 - March 22, 1990 Karen Dillow 20310 84th Place West Edmonds, WA 98020 Dear Karen: -7 7 SID 1991 LARRY S. NAUGHTEN DIPNG� MAYOR After reviewing the whole issue, the most the City can do is a four foot fence, parallel to your neighbor's fence. Whether you go four feet or six feet, you'll need a permit; also a survey if you don't know your lot line. I'll explain the reason we can't do more when I see you. You should probably get a bid, maybe two. We'll also.put in some surface material; probably crushed rock. We won't put in bollards unless it becomes a problem with motorcycles later on. Sincerely, ; F ED ON CITY O.,DS a ten r LSN/db 0 Incorporated August 11, 1890 * Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan CITY OF EDMONDS OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY 447-7000 FAX: 447-2015 9 0 DATE: February 13, 1990 TO: Mayor Naughten V)SS FROM: W. Scott Snyder, Office of the City Attorney RE: Dillow Release LARRY S. NAUGHTEN MAYOR Enclosed is a Settlement Agreement with respect to the Dillow situation. The dollar 'figure to be f illed in should be based upon a written estimate, obtained by the Dillows, of the cost of installing a four foot 'fence. As the Agreement notes, a fence over four feet and up to six feet requires a building official's approval based upon an assessment of the risk to persons using the walkway easement. Typically the city does not like to approve six foot fences next to walkways because they create a corridor sheltered from view which could lead to either danger to children or to other incidents within the sheltered corridor. If you or the Dillows have any comments please give me a call. I have provided a copy of this memo and the Release to Marylou Block as well. The Agreement should go on the Council's consent agenda for approval. WSS/mls/klt Enclosure 0006.050002H/WSS52089M V 2100 Westlake Center Tower, 1601 Fifth Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101-1686 9 Incorporated August 11, 1890 o Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan 0 6 0; �5N u K3 -5- b4o CAJ q f -/ -0 &-,� rr-�� -�rD Pdl"p—, --- 4,e7zo,,A- Off a:19-q w 4v2 (::�-4 Lof �9 4 1? IML4 , Pf 0 = � L-79 ZQ+ 5'&t-,5 )q �) I 0 kf RL� Pi Mr, 1. le tit 0�9 ------ --------- - Ca-� U4`7 0 0 0 0 s 0�7 Ic IC A-D9 the property. The surrounding area is generally RS-8. with some RS-12 in the neigh- borhood. Details of the proposal were . provided in the Planning Commission minutes. Ms. Block stated approximately 60% of the trees would be removed for buildings and roads and the Engineering Department was satisified that drainage could be handled adequately to avoid problems for nearby property owners. She said the topography and site conditions did not justify development of this site as a PRD. She recommended approval with the following conditions: (1) That three planter islands be provided in -de-sac, being located to include existing trees if possible, the center of the cul als to be main - and the remainder of the islands being planted with landscape materi tained by the adjacent property owners; (2) That the planter strip adjacent to the street be included on the east and west side of 84th Pl. W.; (3) That an 8' wide sement be established between Lots 9 and 10 ' to be surfaced and outfitted pedestrian ea x nd to and connect with the 8' with a lockable wood bollard;*(4) That the sidewalk e te easement between Lots 9 and 10; (5) That a pedestrian walkway be constructed along the west side of 84th Ave. W., from the improved portion of the road south to Pine Ridge Park; (6) That trees only be removed with the express approval of the City Planner and after inspection by a qualified expert such as a forester or a landscape architect; (7) That special measures be taken to retain as many trees as possible, t not limited to the adjustment of side yard setback regulations in including bu s consistent with accordance with Section 12.10.050(2)(d)6. She said the proposal wa the Edmonds Policy Plan; it conformed to existing zoning and subdivision regulations; a declaration of nonsignificant adverse environmental impact had been issued, the proposal Would provide a pedestrian access to Pine Ridge Park; and approving the proposal with the stated conditions would give the City tree -cutting control of the site. Councilman Carns noted that the City probably would end up maintaining the planter islands so plants; placed there should be easily maintained. Councilman Gould was concerned with the drainage of the site and City Engineer Jim Adams said there is a drainage problem in this area but this development would not increase that problem, and it probably would not decrease it either. Mrs. Robert Lacher of 8707 202nd S.W. hildren on 202nd, and 84th is a small street in poor repair said there are a lot of c igns at 88th/202nd where teenagers speed. She presented a petition asking for stop s and a posted speed limit of 20 mph. She also noted that in addition to these new homes there are ten others in the same area. Bob Schillberg, attorney representing some of the adjoining property owners, recommended that either the Council make a specific requirement that drainage plans go back to the Council before approval, or at least give the affected property owners a copy of the proposed plans in sufficient time to have them examined by engineers before construction and to afford thein an opportunity for input. Mr . Adams said they previously had agreed to give Mr. Schillberg a copy of the plan for study, and between their engineers and the City's, a satisfactory drainage plan should be developed. Mr. Schillberg also asked that ' the neighbors be given the opportunity to see the tree -cutting plan . He felt the 5 gravel walkway along the back of the lots on the west side of 84th should be eliminated for the benefit of drainage, as there already was a sidewalk on the front side of those lots. He also called attention to the water supply, noting that this development will have an 8" water line fed by a 4" line and feeding into a 4" line. He felt this may cause additional water pressure problems in the area where they already are experiencing such. Mr. Herzberg responded that they are currently working on a h plan to upgrade all water lines to 8". but it will take time, probably falling wit in a five-year time frame. Jerry Swanson of 8308 203rd S.W asked that the walkway on 84th be eliminated. He felt it would add to the drainage problem and also would increase possibilities of vandalism. The representative of Long Brothers Engineers, engineers for the project, said it was their intention to place a ditch beside the walkway to catch all of the runoff. Carol Ellington of 2023 186th W. said that whenever they ask for road improvements they are told they cannot be done until storm sewers and larger water lines are in, so she asked how they could put in the roads here without those. Councilman Carns explained what the Drainage Ordinance requires regarding retention of water on the site. Dick Osterhalt, the developer, said they planned to save every tree possible, and the more trees that they save the less water runoff there will be. He said the walkway on 84th was planned for the access of two homes there and that it would not be necessary to cut into the bank to construct the walkway. He said he had successfully developed property on Mercer Island which has the most stringent tree - cutting program in existence. He noted that at the Planning Commission meeting it had been pointed out, regarding the water main, that it would improve the pressure on He said they would comply with everything 202nd until the lines are improved. alkway on-84th, recommended by the Council. After further discussion about the w MOTION: COUNCILMAN CARNS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN GOULD, TO GRANT PRELIMINARY APPROVAL Withdrawn EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 4 - August 21, 1979 TO P-6-79 AND THAT IT NOT GO TO THE COUNCIL FOR FINAL APPROVAL ON THE CONSENT AGENDA BUT INSTEAD BE SET AS AN AGENDA ITEM, APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING: THAT THE THREE PLANTERS BE PLANTED WITH LOW MAINTENANCE PLANTINGS, THAT A DRAINAGE PLAN BE SUBMITTED AT LEAST 21 DAYS PRIOR TO THE HEARING BEFORE THE COUNCIL ON FINAL APPROVAL, THAT A TREE -CUTTING PLAN ALSO BE SUBMITTED AT LEAST 21 DAYS PRIOR TO THE HEARING BEFORE THE COUNCIL, THAT THE ATTORNEYS FOR THE NEIGHBORS IN THE AREA ALSO BE GIVEN COPIES OF BOTH, AND THAT THE GRAVEL WALKWAY ON 84TH BE ELIMINATED FROM THE PROPOSAL. Councilwoman Allen felt the walkway was going'to happen, whether installed by the developer or whether developed informally by people walking that area, and she preferred that the City have a say as to where it would be. She felt that walkways that just happen increase the drainage problem. Jerry Swanson who had spoken against inclusion of the walkway said there are several pathways there now with which they had lived for several years and the children wander through on their way to school, but they did not want to invite more with a 5' gravel walkway. Community Development Director John LaTourelle said his office had agreed to give the neighbors the oppor- tunity to review the tree -cutting and drainage plans, but if the Council asked for them 21 days before final approval the improvements would all have been installed. It was determined that the neighbors or their attorney would be given the information prior to construction of the drainage or cutting of trees. Mr. Osterhalt said, however, that they would have to clear the area for the street right-of-way before the lots could be marked. COUNCILMAN CARNS STATED THE MOTION WOULD ACCEPT THE RIGHT- OF-WAY CLEARING, AND THE SECOND AGREED. Councilman Carns then decided to restate his motion. THEREFORE, COUNCILMAN CARNS WITHDREW THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR, AND THE SECOND MOTION: ALSO WAS WITHDRAWN. COUNCILMAN CARNS THEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN HERB, THAT AT LEAST 21 DAYS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION OF THE DRAINAGE OR CUTTING OF THE TREES THE ATTORNEY FOR THE NEIGHBORS WILL BE GIVEN THE DRAINAGE PLAN AND THE TREE -CUTTING PLAN, AND CITY STAFF APPROVAL ALSO WILL BE REQUIRED. ANY QUESTION WILL GO BACK TO THE COUNCIL PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. FURTHER, THE PROPOSED GRAVEL WALKWAY ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE DEVELOPMENT WILL BE DELETED FROM THE PLANS; AND OTHER CONDITIONS STATED BY THE ASSISTANT PLAIINER ARE TO BE ACCEPTED. MOTION CARRIED. COUNCILMAN GOULD THEN MOVED TO PLACE ON THE SEPTEMBER 4, 1979 AGENDA A REPORT AND DISCUSSION ON THE TRAFFIC PROBLEMS AT 84TH AND 202ND. COUNCILMAN NORDQUIST SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED. HEARING ON P.C. RESOLUTION 630. RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF SHORELINES PERMIT TO IMPROVE SOUTH COUNTY SENTOR—CENTER (FILE SM-4-7v) Assistant City Planner Mary Lou Block said this plan was consistent with the Shoreline Master Program urban designation and conformed to the Policy Plan and the Commercial Waterfront designation in the Edmonds Land Use Guidelines. A declaration of no significant adverse environmental impact had been issued. Approval was recommended and Ms. Block stated that access to the beach was an important consideration. The public portion of the hearing was opened. Fremont Case of 1411 8th Ave. N. said there is a parking problem at the Center and 14 additional stalls.could be put on the concrete slab area, sloping them toward the beach for drainage. He did not see the purpose of breaking up the concrete and making a sand dune in its place. He said only one parking space would be lost to get access to 14 more. Public Works Director Fred Herzberg responded that the Policy Plan states there be MOTION: will no parking within 60' of the bulkhead. The public portion of the hearing was then closed. COUNCILMAN NAUGHTEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN KASPER, TO APPROVE SM-4-79 AS SUBMITTED. Councilman Carns agreed with Mr. Case that there is a parking problem and he questioned the parking restriction stated by Mr. Herzberg. Community Development Director John LaTourelle said the policy throughout the entire State of Washington is that everything will be done to prevent waterfront parking lots, and he stated he thought that was a good policy. THE MOTION THEN CARRIED. DISCUSSION TTEMS- WATF070 NT PARKING; WATERFRONT TRAFFIC; ACQUISITION OF AMTRAK ALKWAT City Engineer Jim Adams displayed two traffic plans for Railroad Ave., recommending Plan B which was one-way north from Dayton to Main and requiring a right turn onto Main from Railroad. There would be a bus island at Railroad and Main where the bus would turn right. The island would facilitate bus turns, eliminating the possibility of unseen small cars which are hazards for buses turning right. Mike Christopher of SCPTBA said he had been working with the Public Works Department and although the plan may not be Ideal, there were trade-offs. Bob Morrison of 250 Beach Pl. asked EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 5 - August 21, 1979 NNFIJ SAVER] 00875 Manufactured for S.P. Rdmrds, Go., Atlanta, GA 0 5255 008751 4 IMPORTANT MESSAGE FOR A.M. BAT li Li ---TIME 'P.M. M_ OF t-7 7 19 2,5 PHONE 10, I&L , &-) AREA CODE NUMBER EXTENSION TELEPHONED PLEASE CALL CAME TO SEE YOU WILL CALL AGAIN WANTS TO SEE YOU RUSH RETURNED YOUR CALL SPECIAL ATTENTION MESSAGE v.J-8,.c 43 2- n o c-.a- C"C' SIGNED 17 �va /),� W 0- Qv_ "y SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT WHEREAS, the undersigned Karen Dillow and Larry W. Dillow, the owners of.certain property described in this Agreement, have asserted.- claims that a public walkway easement was improperly relocated by administrative action of the City of Edmonds to a location immediately adjacent to their residential property, and have asserted that they have been damaged thereby; WHEREAS, the City of Edmonds believes that in all respects it has acted appropriately and in conformance with law with respect to the relocation of the public easement; WHEREAS, both parties, while believing their position to be correct, wish to resolve this matter in accordance with the terms and conditions set forth in this Settlement Agreement, NOW THEREFORE, Larry W. Dillow and Karen Dillow, husband and wife (hereinafter "Owners") and the City of Edmonds, Washington, an optional code municipal corporation (hereinafter 11city"), enter into this Settlement Agreement under the terms and conditions set forth herein. 1. waivers, herein, of Consideration of Parties. In consideration of the release, and hold harmless of the owners set forth the city of Edmonds agrees to pay the sum This amount has been determined and arrived at as the cost of installing a four foot high fence along the boundary of the hereinafter described residential property and a pedestrian walkway 0006.05002H/WSS52088A WSS/mls 02/12/90-1 easement. Upon payment of the aforementioned sum, the obligations of the City of Edmonds shall be and are at an end. 2. Subiect Site. The subject site is located at 20310 84th Place, Edmonds, Washington and is legally described as: Lot 8, Pine Ridge Estates according to the plat thereof recorded at Book I Page of the records of Snohomish County, Washington. 3. Construction of Pence. The aforementioned sum has been provided by the City of Edmonds in consideration of the Release, Waiver and Hold Harmless and Indemnity Provisions contained in this Agreement. While calculated upon the cost of constructing a fence adjacent to the public walkway and on the property of the Owners, nothing herein shall be interpreted to require the Owners to construct such fence. The Owners are notified that construction of a fence in excess of four feet in height is regulated by the provisions of Chapter 17.30 of the Edmonds Community Development Code. Fences less than four feet in height do not require a permit from the City. A fence in excess of four feet and up to six feet requires the specific approval of the building official. Nothing herein shall be interpreted to exempt the Owners from the restrictions and regulations of the Community Development Code and Chapter 17.30 thereof. 4. Touch and Concern the Land. This Agreement is a covenant which touches and concerns the affected property. At the option of the City of Edmonds it may be recorded. As a covenant, touching and concerning the land, this Agreement shall 0006.05002H/WSS52088A -2- WSS/mls 02/12/90-1 bind all future Owners and successors in interest in the aforementioned subject site. 5. Waiver, Release, Hold Harmless and Indemnification Provision. The Owners, on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors in interest and assigns, do hereby waive and relinquish any and all claims as hereinafter described and promise to hold harmless and indemnify the City of Edmonds, it's officers, agents and employees from any and all claims of any kind or nature arising from or out of the actions and administrative approvals of the City of Edmonds, it's officers, agents and employees with respect to the location or relocation of a pedestrian walkway easement, public utility easements and the underlying approval of the plat of Pine. Ridge Estates which have occurred to the date of execution of this Agreement. This promise to hold harmless and indemnify shall apply to any loss, claim or liability of any kind or nature whether occurring to persons or property and arising as above set forth. 6. Whole Agreement, Amendment. This Agreement constitutes the whole agreement between the parties and is not based on any representation, written or oral not contained within the body of this Agreement. This Agreement shall be amended only upon the express written consent of all the parties hereto. DONE this - day of F 1990. OWNERS: Larry W. Dillow 0006.05002H/WSS52088A -3- WSS/mls 02/12/90-1 Karen Dillow STATE OF WASHINGTON ) )ss: COUNTY OF I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Larry W. Dillow signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his free and voluntary act for the purposes mentioned in this instrument. DATED this _ day of , 1990. NOTARY PUBLIC My commission expires: STATE OF WASHINGTON ss: COUNTY OF I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Karen Dillow signed this instrument and'acknowledged it to be her free and voluntary act for the purposes mentioned in this instrument. DATED this _ day of 1990. NOTARY PUBLIC my commission expires: THE CITY OF EDMONDS 0006.05002H/WSS52088A -4- WSS/mls 02/12/90-1 Attest/Approved: Jacqueline G. Parrett, City Clerk Approved as to form: City AttorneyU 0006.05002H/WSS52088A -5- WSS/mis 02/12/90-1 CF"IT FRAME GRATE SO THAT RESTRICTOR/POLLUT#001 DEVICE is VmqLg AT loss of, OPENM AND CIRECny CS 74" CV9111 THE LAW911. /3 CHAIN 200 CAPACrY SLACK WHEN QATZ 12 DOwK WELD TO CJL VVA#Amc� CB Z 7YAf jf AT V:, ala sif t 7�T sm "M C.& 7-- LADC411 STEM B_ -P 94 71 W_ rmoL 7ZP a �"rC7- 7,rA�e WIT" Milk. A 'z 5- CEAfENT coovcRETE TYPE IL CATCH BASIN 21 Comp W41 FWW RESTFUCTOR I& AsPm4t. T CLA33 CONCAE OL DEVICt Tr -CONTR SL.wo.oltl DETAIL'O'A Y.: V 'wim. compT DEPTH cit. SLAX4CING TOP COURSE IS' jWly. Wal". DEPTH CA SURFACIffto DAU CW)t.SE 4 -4 TYPICAL.ROADWAY SECTION .7 NO SCALE _Zb t L SCALZ rO'; R K C H-, f: M W -R ri Laq, I.- 1�7 1� L: W171 -5 7 -.4'eff 0%1 -Z7--fW%44%- K I AV% P P.0 V A L .4 3y a a ers Evig'"'eri PLAN a PROFILE'- ROAD a STORM.. DRAiNAGE iV TER".CX PINE RIDGE. ESTATES a CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTOW' --,f 41,mV,4 ,41,V.4 OFFBET FRAW GA-TE SO THAT RESTRICTOR/ POLLUTION oEvKX IS VtSIM AT EDGE OF OPENING AND DIRECTLY (NER THE LADDER. CHAIN- 200 CAPACITY ILI WHEN GATE IS 'ELD TO C.S. FRA-E. DOWN. Wl 7-11 ;'W-- _<ZW�V,0,4,VZ;' 77 7- _-4PkV_4, W_9..*l11AA5 7r-W _-x4 /wz_- jr -T '3 pr 4, si- STOL GAM C.B. 0.5 MOL Z61--47-10,UX LADOCIIII STEPIS P) I _'_" "w4'r- 72Xf Z plod J" or-"uz *Ay —rmoL N" OUTLAT ilpt- INLET PkK- ;Z -26 _C1,4 d- WOWC-- WAT13MGKT CLEAN -OUT GAT9— verrm wk. 8 GAUGE. SLW a* RESTRIC;W PLJ WITH NCH OPENM A STE PA"s AM I C L'L K BALWOWD , T �AT I "PI1142 'OA E R TE C CPItOTECTW* T Uo= CENENT TYPE U CATCH BASIN E? 0 \'A L CONCRErE 5' FLOW RESTRICTOR —OIL POLLUTION. a, CoAlpT' DEPTA ASPHALT WALK CONTROL DEVICE MASS A4 -k j 5;r Q I 01: 1 1— t � 1:v AAW WZU --I sow 1.rAwr'r1TAfyx -Of jowr 1. COAAPT DEPTq Ck SURFACINr- Top COVASE 4. CompIr DEpTM CA SURFACING BASE COURSE TVPICAL ROADWAV 5ECTION- 100 SCALE SCA J_ E DETAIL NA.z., y 3 4, H2- Z" 40 3;�Cqjjt' 7- cce 4, qng. Bra ers Engineering', . Inc. 1 No I REV. a, on PLAN a PROFILE -ROAD& STORM DRAiNAGE �s "'-ef -2 20THI 16401UNTLA TERRACE. WASH.'r. 96043 PINE RIDGE ESTATES pe CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 04h -i 017 /-07'- eA500wee2-1- ow /_07�5 CITY OF EDMDEMOS 250 5111 AVE. N. - EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 98020 - (206) 771- 3202 COMMUNITY SERVICES DATE: July 18, 1988 TO: Tom Belt 917 9th Ave. S. Edmonds, -WA 98020 TRANSMITTING:. Quit Claim Deed AS YOU REQUESTED: FOR YOUR INFORMATION: AS WE DISCUSSED: FOR APPROVAL: TOR YOUR FILE: REVIEW AND COMMENT COMMENT AND RETURN: MINUTES OF 14EETING: REMARKS: LARRY S. NAUGHTEN MAYOR PETER E. HAHN DIRECIOR xxx PLANNING DIVISION Diane Cunninqham PUBLIC WORKS PLANNING PARKS AND RECREATION ENGINEERING ,2� JZ/a :771 416') ,�.Iew h - aaro /xI 7h- wo C"Y CIT '-_.,CLERK CIVIC CENTER EDMONDS. WA 9802*0 0 co M M4 N10 EXCISE —1 AX REQUIRED 7' Aj KE B 3 County T 0 4 - Quifcia,im�-Ajeec'l- (CO R PO RATE. FO R M). THE GRANTOR CITY OF EDMONDS, a . municipal corporation for and inconsideration of Extinguishment of portion of easement C Ij E X K, FoRm L57R conveys.and quit claims to Rene VanLoverb n* and Di ana L'. . VanLoveren and their heirs and assigns the following described real estate, situated in the County of SNOHOMISH State of Waahington including any i . nterest therein -which grantor may hereafter acquire: Thjis instrument is given to rel,ease-and relinquish that portion of the easement es tablished in the recording of the Plat of Pine Ridge Estates, according to the Plat �,hereof recorded in Volume 43 of Plats, page 1.14, r6c'ords of Snohomi.sh County, Washington, described as follows: Beginning.at the Southwest'cqr�her of 'Lot 9 of Pine Ridge Estates; thence East along the South line of Lot.9 for 'i feet;'thence North 2401511211 East to a point wh1ch is 50.'27 feet South of the Nor h line of said Lot 9 -being the true point of Sr beginning of this description; thence 'continuing North 24015'11211 East for 3 feet; thence Southerly parallel with the Westerly line of Lot 9 for 3 feet; I thence Easterly in a straight line for 2.feet to the -true point of beginning. The Northwest co ' rner of the existing house -on Lot 9 of Pine Ridge Estates encroac . hes onto the 10-foot wal.kway and waterl-ine easement as established in the Plat of Pine Ridge Estates, and the�deletion of this 2 foot by 3 foot portion of said easement will eliminate the.house encroachment. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, said corporation has caused this instrument to be executed by its proper officers �Z and 1t.V9rpQ16U seal to ereunto affixed this .15th day of , "'T I "' June, 1988. Lj 0 & H Y ... QL.ERIN ..S ........ . ....... .................................. CD S BY ...... ......... ... . .......... C.) cr) -ki. 4 ".. c\1 o r (,- � Lj Z -0� �r,' By........ ...... .. ........................ STATE Of ---IV 014 City tlerk xkxo?xl&x co qX.-C) County oR S mish On this th day. of June 1988 before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, duly 'Commissioned and sworn, personally appeared and .. tor. me known' -tcl be"the Mayor fxoskkXt and City Cl erkSoMpy, respectively, of t he City of Edmonds, 17,:.': thpoe rprati6rl -that executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged the -said instrument to be the free and t*XF tqt -`and*'4eed of said corporation, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that ',.,,Atjthorized to'execute the*said instrument and that the -seal affixed is the corporate seal of said nylhAncl 'And official seal hereto affixed the d :;year first above written. B L I 6 0 or / : iI ��, �z�- .............. `40. Notary P�ublic in n or he State of 4 �0/ residing at 8.8,06230244. MY COMMISSlom t ".SIPAGE ORDER NO. ESCROW NO. MORTGAGOR 9. P/0 PLAT MAP Vol PG PO,2wz> ST'rw. -7 Ime- V-915.47 -7,0.00 T ZE W /01. qq- /7. R �4 Af /Z 3. fe- 127. 67 14' %3 .123.40 /2.7. ?0 Sb N 8 1 'SC,'00',E f\7 ..0/ INV 7 0 q-j( -SE 7- A4 0 A/ IN CASE �q 'QD 00.0 5 W ci,—vrix-1-1,ve oA sicrloN- DI-T FA 5 7- ;4 C'Z,WVE ln� 7- Ica-,Iew C-/ 470vobtJ, C-6 45-' 31-9. 7 21-35-1 11-39 I C-7 1 C-+ 148000'3,-/� *-I-' 53,4;z N/O.2/` 3a34IC-8- 67'1t.'29* 4S' 52. Of 2 L,# JIL C - -F �33- 0, N In tk This map does not purport to show all highways. roads or casements affecting said property; no liability is assumed for variations in dimensions and location. WY OF EDMONDS, ..'�rmit No. COMMUNITY SERVICPS DEPARTMENT Issue Date RIGHT- OF-WAYCONSTRUCTION PERMIT A. Owner: kEVIE— VA A/ /,) V�E /)I� Itl B. Contractor: 8'JA LiMAAIOA(r(QA� Name CJ_ 6a,7ee; C� 67 M �n �qdq e s S" City State Zip i Stat e- Zip 7Zf State license Number Tele�hone Number' e Address or Vicinity of Construction: Type of Work to be Done: Work in Connection With: 0 Sub or Plat kSingle Family, 0 City Projects 0 Muitifa�ffiil 0 Utility al /* '.0, C Merci 4 Z t ! 'I.. .. I Pavement'Cut: El U APPLICANT TO READ AND SIGN < INDEMNITY: Applicant understands-i- d by his signature to this application, agrees to hold the City of Edmonds >4 harmless.from any injuries, ddihages,.,o clai' s of any kind or description whatsoever, forseen or unforg6en, that may be made against the City of Edmonds, r any of its departments or employees, including or not limited to the defense of any -legal pro&6difigs including defe S�d'costs, court costs and attorney fees by reason of 'ranting this permit. 9 ,.l THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR WORKMANSHIP AND MATERIALS FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR FOLLOWING THE FINAL INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE WORK. 0 U Funds held from the Security Deposit (estimated restoration fee) will be held until the final.street patch is completed by City forces, at which time a debit or credit will be processed for issuance to the applicant. 0 * A 24 hour notice is required for inspection; Please call Public Works: 771-3202 e Work is to be inspected during progress and at completion. 0 Restoration to be in accordance with City Code. 0 Street to be kept clean at all times. 9 Traffic Control to be in accordance with City regulations. 9 All street -cut ditches must be patched with asphalt or City approved material prior to end of working day; no exceptions. I understand theabove.and that this permit must be available at the job site for inspection purposes at 611 times. Signature: V Date: C 7 Owner or Contractor This Permit Must Be Posted at the Job Site For Inspection Purposes Call DIAL -DIG Prior To Beginning Work ISSUED BY: Z Time Authorized: Void after —days. 0 Special Cooditio W rn ;:� I fil,�qllv4wAfy a Amendments: U P4 ___� - # OW-11 0 PERMIT FEE: Security Deposit: Receipt No.: Fund I I I Fee: Street Cut Dimensions: X NO WORK TO BEGIN PRIOR TO PERMIT ISSUANCE Eng. Div. July 1985 ek_, 4X/ aU9 ove-p(— jqg-2) h1a k6a-le- 0 /7 2-o7l- 120 LQ 4P-� /�21w,rc �y �� V- USE ERMIT ZONE NUMBER TQ�D MS CITY OF EDM DS CONSTRUCTION PERMIT APPLICATION joa R N Es AVUH NA 0 ' AME OF BUSINESS) cc V A LEGAL D S ION 'HECKI SUBDIVISION, NO. LID NO. w MAILING A Z 0 CITY A /)f TELEPHON NUMXBR PUBLIQ RIGHT OF WAY PER OFFICIAL STREET MAP. EXISTING REQUIRED DEDICATION PROPOSED N CAM C RIGHT OF WAY CONSTRUCTION PERMIT REQUIRED 0 Uj ADDRESS STREET USE PERMIT REQUIRED C Z SEE ENGINEERING MEMO DATED Uj CITY TELEPHONE NUMBER REMARKS NAME cc ADDRES4.,. 0 I.- METER SIZE BUILDING SUPPLY SIZE FIXTURE UNITS L) cc 12 CITY TELEPHONE NUMBER REMARKS Z 01 L) STATE LICENSE NUMBER SIGN AREA ENV. REVIEW ADS NO. ALLOWED PROPOSED COMPLETE EXEMPT Legal Description of Property - Include all easements (show below or attach four copies) SHORELINE# 4 VARIANCE OR CU PLANNING REVIEW By DATE U) W f YARDS HEIGHTTOT COVERAGE K R Z REA FRONT SIDE REMARKS CL 12 ElNEW RESIDENTIAL PLUMBING 10/1V /I ADDIALTER El COMMERCIAL MECHANICAL REPAIR RETAINING WALL SIGN FE;NCE CHECKED BY TYPE OF.,GONSTRUCTION CODE HEIGPT I _Fn EXCAVATE* OR FILL r �_r7 PRIE-MOVE INSPJ swim SPECIAL INSPE AREA occ P C OCCUPANT 9ROU AN X �of- LOAD, up Z;t��j t'COMPLIANCE INSP.-� -Pool: REQUIRED WOOD STOVE-/ ID YES ONO IN APT. B,LDG RENEWAL Z 0 PROGRESS INSPECTIONS PER UBC 305 't R. - 'STORIES JMBER OF NUMBER OF I LU JN� D� LLING UNITS 0 - NATURE OF WORK TO BE DONE (ATTACH PLOT PLAN) VALUATION FEE 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, sidewolks, driveways, marquees, etc.) will require separate permission. STATE SURCHARGE Permit.-APplication: 180 Days INJERGY-CODE- Permit 6WiIt41'-Veat"-ProvIdedAAft;r I k1g[Started Within_fK.DayC__ Applicant, on behalf of his or her ipouse, heirs, assigns nd A[,�'( W, J,, 1� 17 1177.7", i F; u) successors In interest, agrees to lndemr�fy defend and hold T) harmless the -City of Edmonds , Washin6,-�7-�, its officials, All ill- 2 employees, and agents from any and all clairr,;6�4,)r damages of ir < whatever nature, arising directly or Indirectly fro.p,,, the Issuance x I�Wdeemed to PLAN CHECK DEPOSIT 0 of this permit. Issuance of this permit shall no' _j modify, waivo-.br reduce any requirement -of any city ordinance 0 x nor limit In any,way the City's ability to enforce any ordinance TOfAL AMOUNT DUE. provision." I hereby acknowledge that I have read this applicgt �thatthe :,the duly ATTENTION APR�ICATION APPROVAL information given Is correct; and that I am th authorized agent of the owner. I agree to comply with,"city and THIS' PERMIT - state laws regulating construction; and In doing the worki�luthorlz- AUTHORIZES this application is not a permit until ed thereby, no person will be employed In violation of tii6l Labor ONLY� THE signed by the Building Official or his Code of the State of Washington relating to Workmen's Compensa- WORK NOTED Deputy; and fees are paid, and receipt is tio-n Insur2nce. acknowledged in space provided. INSPECTION SIGNATURE (OWNER OR AGENT) DEPARTMENT C6kL'S SIGNATUREZ /.--'DqE .�JDATE SIGNED CITY` 0 Dmbw; RFLEASED'-BY: DATE 0771-32 ATTENTION y. IT IS UNLAWFUL TO. USE OR OCCUPY A BUILDING OR STRUC RE UNTIL A FINAL INSPECTION HAS BEEN MADE AND APPROVAL R ORIGINAL — File YELL., !JV — Inspector A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY HAS BEEN GRANTED. UBC CHAPTER 3, PINK — Owner GOLD — Assessor 10247 0(-j -COMMISSION ED�ONDS' PLANNNIN� 1979 June 2 Ch6ivynan 0 rder -b The regular meeting of.the Edmonds Planning Comrnissi'n was called to 0 y m. in the Council Chambe,s of the Edmonds Civic Center. John McGibbon at 7:35 p. sent, introduced the Staff, and explained the Chai man McGibbon welcomed those pre procedure of the'meeting. SENT ABSENT 'STAFF PRE PRESENT City Planner Valina Walker Mary Lou Block, Ass t )ohn McGibbon John Lalourell6, Commun. Devel. Dir. Fred Ross j Richard Pearson, Code,Pev. Proj. M9,r- Floyd C. Smith Felix Re isner.,Censultant Keith LaBelle Jim Adans.9 Asst. City Engineer -Laura Hall John Hodgin Larry Martin, City Attorney Jackie Parrett, Deputy City Clerk Katherine Allen, Ex,.officio APPROVAL OF MINUTES COMMISSIONER ROSS 13, 1979'had been distributed M-inutes of,the meeting of June 0 APPROVE*THE MINUTES OF JUNE 13, 1979. ISSIONER 'SMITH,. T MOVED, SECON-H BY, CU_Ml"�,- ED A morj�or-, CA9.RI Eb. -1-78 TO THE SMT dMMISSIONER MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HALL TO MOVE PRD C DA, FOLLOWING P-6-39. MOTION CARRIED. VS. Block SECOiD POSITION ON THE --AEGULAR AGEN f significance had been"issued indicating . advised, regarding R-42�,'9 that a declarat.ion o n EIS will be required-. She-' sugge.sted there is a potential enV-�ronmental impact, so a COMMISSIONER SMITH MOVED, SECONDED BY this 'item be continuedt�ojia date uncertain. ALLOW FOR�THE SUBMISSION COMI-,�ISSIONER ROSS, TO CONiIINUE R-4-79 TO A DATE UNCERTAIN TO OF AN EIS.- MOTION CARRI t AGENDA P-6-79. PINE RIDGE ESTIATtES 17-Lot subdivision South of-202nd St. S.1W. and west of S4th- ve. W.- Ms. Block sho e& slides of this site which is heavily wooded and has some w 'level. Oine Ridge changes in topography. The west side of the site,is ther surrounding area is RS-8. The Park is south of�the site and -the o W. The site nroposed street within the site will be designatedZ40 Pl . includes 4.1 acres with a cul-de-.sac access. The drainage is a concern and will require extensive planning. Traffic in the area will increase by 136-� Ms. Block, felt a standard development, rather than 170 auto trips -daily. a PRD, was preferable for this site because the surrounding areas were. developed.a� single family homes and there are no particularly sensitive �din'g this site. The site plan was displayed, all the lots . issues regar 1. ft. Those lots bor*dered by 84th Ave. W. will being w6ll,;over 8,000 sc ont yard setback on 84th Ave. W.� as, well as -on the cul-de-sac. require / a-fr qu i red i . to1ead to An 8' access easement between Lots 10 and 11 will be ` re red from that easement. �ine Ridge Park and a side yard setback will be requ,11 An ali.ernate street design suggested by the Engineeting firm wo�uld include e center of the road with existing trees remaining planter islands down th iewed the Engireering in those islands. Asst. City Engineer Jim Adams rev requirements and said he saw no reason fordifficulty in LOMPlying with ms.,Block r drainage requirements. ecommended approval with the followi'ng conditionst (1) THAT THREUPLANTER IS,_ANDS BE PROVIDED IN THE CENTER OF THE CUL-DE-SAC, BEING LOCATED TO INCLUDE EXISTING TREES IF POSSIBLE, AND THE REMAINDER OF THE ISLANDS BEING PLANTED WITH LANDSCAPE MATERIALS TO BE MAINTAINED BY THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS. (2) THAT THE PLANTER STRIP ADJACENT TO THE - STkEET RE.INCLUDED ON THE EAST AND WEST SIDE OF S4TH PL. W. (3) THAT AN ' 8' WIDE PEDESTRIAN EASEMENT 61 ESTABLISHED BETWEEN LOTS 10 AND 11, TO BE SURFACED AND OUTFITTED WITH A LOCKABLE WOOD BOLLARD. (4) THAT THE SIDEWA!-K, EXTEND TO AND CONNECT WITH THE 8' EASEMENT BETWE"N LOTS 10 AND 11. (5) THAT A PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY BE CONSTRUCTED ALONG THE WEST SIDE OF 84TH AVE W, I WS6ZA11L,,: FROM THE IMPROVED PORTION OF TFE ROAD SOUTH, Tj PINE.RID . GE"PARK. (6) THAT TREES ONLY,BE REMOVED WITH THE*EXPRESS APPROVAL OF T I HE CITY PLANNER AND AFTER INSPECTION BY A QUALIFIED EXPERT SUCH AS A FORESTER OR A LANDSCAPE, ARCHITECT. (7) THAT S . PECIAL MEASURES BE TAKEN TO RETAIN AS MANY TREES AS POSSIBLE, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED To THE ADJUSTMENT OF SIDE YARD SETBACK REGULATIONS IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 12.10.050(d)6 WHERE EXISTING TREES JUSTING THE ALLOWABLE BUILDING AREA. The reasons WOULD BE PRESERVED BY AD given for the approval of P-6-79.were:. (1) 7HE PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT WITH -LAN . U THE EDMONDS POLICY P (2) THE PROPOSAL CONFORMIS TO EXISTING ZONING AND SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS. (3) A DECLARATION OF NONSIGNIFICANT ADVERSE D BEEN ISSUED. (4) THE PROPOSAL WILL PROVIDE A ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT HA K, (5) APPROVING THE PROPOSAL WITH THE PEDESTRIAN ACCESS TO PINE RIDGE PAR CUTTI'N'G CONTROL OF THE SITE. FOREGOING.CONDITIONS WILL CIVE THE CITY TREE - The public portion of the hearing was openia& Mike Miller of Long Brothers'Engineering, Inc., said the applicant concurred with the findings and recommendations of the Staff. However, he felf a, ,walkway the fuli length of 84th Ave. W. was an undue burden on the develcper. He said they would be willing -to provide a walkway from where they exit to i-ification on the tree cutting, and Ms. Block the oark. He asked for cla advised.him, -that a tree cutting pl-an,is required -and the_C4ty will want assurance that the remaining trees are healthy. Bob Schillberg, attorney representing some of the nearby landowners, said they were concerned regarding the availabili'--y of services as there currently was only a.4". e was low. He felt that to draw a�n 8" water line on 202nd and water pressur line from a 4" line would be a problem. He also.expressed concern about drainage and said trees should be retained. He felt the walkway idea was good but that it was proposed going down the steepest, part of the site, and. he suggested it go through the park property instead of private prooerty. Cher . yl Lacher of 8704 202nd S.W. expressed concern about the traffic,on 202nd, and she felt additional traffic signage'was needed. She was advised to contact Mr. Adams and he would discuss this with her. Craig Hillis Of 6507 204th S.W. said the zoning on the 204th St. side is RS-12*., Gail Cardwell of 8301 203rd Pi. S.W. said they would like somebody from the City to.be present when the trees are cut to enforce the City's tr6e-cutting restrictions. Jerry Swanson of 8308 203rd P1. S.W. was concerned about drainage as he already had a drainage problem, and another lady added that drywells would not,do the iob. Mr. Adams'advised those present that the City was in the process of replacing all 4" mains and, in addition, a loop would be required from'202nd to 204th which shou ' Id increase ability for fire protection in the area. He said this development wiii better the situation rather tnan be detrimental. Regarding the walkway, he said the City requires that when somebody b.uilds next to a public right-of-way he must develop one-half of the street, but in this case a street would serve very 11ttle purpose, serving only one lot, so the Staff felt a walkway would'be more appropriate than putting in a half street. He -noted that the walkway is a lesser requirement than the half street, responding to Mr. Miller's objection to the walkway. Regarding drainage, he said the Drainag . e Ordinance had only been in effect about two years and each of these new developments betters the drainage situation because of the current ' requirements. He outlined some of the requirements, noting th.at as a.mini ' mum the rate of ruhoff must be no faster than it was before the development, a drainage plan is required with all calculations showing how the increased runoff w**,ll be taken care of, the plan is checked to assure it meets all requirements and, prior to any construction �eing donp, a temporary erosion pl;tn is required. �egarding tree cutting, Community Development Director John LaTourelle advised that his Staff will go Out at the start of corstruction and, based on the plan, will require that the developer red -flag the significant trees on the property and indicate which trees are to be cut and which are not. . He also said that the City will be happy to make.available to the ,neighbors the plans that are submitted so they can review them before construction. Jerry Swanson saild the walkway between Lots 10 and 11 should be shifted to the end of the cul-de-sac wherE it exits to the p&rk property. Ms. Block responded that the City would have no objection to relocating it EDW)NDS-PLANNING LOMMISSION Page 2 - June 27, 1979 A bet . ween Lott 9 and 10 and the applicant also was agreeable to that. Mr; Cardwell inquired whether the Schillberg said he was satisfied. Gail Engineer's office would actually look at the property when the plan is submitted, and Mr. Adams said the Drainage Engineer checks each independently., going out and lo�king at the property. The public portion of the hearing was closed. Commissioner Hall asked whether a PRD development would help the erosion problem by clustering of the units. Ms. Block responded that the Engineering Division appeared to be satisfied that the drainage could be taken care of properly, and when a PRD is suggested it often has a townhouse configuration which the neighbors are unhappy about becausp they feel townhouses are multi-fammily. Commissioner Smith said he th(,-.ght the plan wns good and he was confident the drainage could be taken care of satisfactorily. He agreed that the walkway would be better located between tots 9 and 10 than between 10 and 11. Commissioner Hall suggested to those concerned neighbors that they. be present when they hear the bulldozers, go in and. -tart taking out the7 trees. COMMISSIONER SMITH THEN MOVED, SErONDED BY COMMISSIONER -R,01SS,-THAT P-6-79 BE APPROVED WITH THE CO1,,1.D.1T I ONS-AND -FOR THE-REAS014S GIVEN �Y MS.,BLOCK IN HER PRESENTATION, WITH THE EXCEPTION THAT lHE THE 8' WALKWAY EASEMENT WIL . L BE BETWEEN LOTS 9 AND 10, RATHER THAN BETWEEN LOTS 10 AND 11. MOTION CARRIED. Commissioner LaBelle was not present for this vote, arrivin . g shortly after it was taken. A short recess was announced following this hearing. IRD-1-78 "WISPY WILLOWS" - LONG BROTHERS.ENGINEERING - Request to extend the preliminarry approvai given June.27, 1978 by the NtyCouncil for an 11-uni, PRD located on 80th Ave. W. on the north side of 212th St. S.W. (RS-8) The letter requesting extensio ' n was received from Long Brothers Engineering, Inc. on behalf of Gillespie Construction. Such extensions are provided by Section 12.10-090 of the Zon4ng Code. There was no discussion. The hearing was opened to the public, no one wished to speak4 and the the,public portion TO was closed. COMMISSIONER HALL MOVED , SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LaBELLE, 6 -78. MOTION APPROVE THE EXTENSION OF THE PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF PRD-1 CARRIED. :R-1-79 Recodification of elements of Edmonds City Code pertaining to land use regulation, including: Title 12, Zoning and Platting; Title 7, Stre , ets and Sidewalks; Title 6, Public Services and Utilities; Title 10, Fire; Title 11, Buildings; and Title 20, Sign Code. Community Development Director John LaTour011e reviewed in summary the proposed Community Development Code which will be developed in two phases. A draft. of the first phase had been provided the Commissioners. This will incorporate prucedural changes, including the hearing examiner system, a3 well as a general reorganization and rewriting of iand use policies and regulations. Felix Reisner reviewed the hearing examiner concept for the Comissioners. It was aareed that the material provided was too lengthy to study this evening, so a special work session was scheduled for July 19 for the discussion of'CR-1-79. There was no further business to coiTie before the Commission, and the meeting was adjourned at 10:05 p.m. I 0 EDMONDS PLANNING COMMISSION Page 3 June 27, 1979 FILE # P-6-79 IFOI;4%1 FOR DEC12,1ZATION OF XONSIGNIFIOWCE] Description of prq)osal 17 lot subdivision of 4.13 acres PrOP014C.'11t Dick Osterholt and Mark Harrington I,OCatj-011 Of PrOJ)05�11- South of 202nd Street S.W. and west of 84th Avenue West J,cad Aponc), City o-f Edmonds 1his proposal. has bccn deten-ninal to Rmw=,/not havel a si.-ni-fi.cant ad- verse jj;!]),;Ct Up011 -'Lile emviroj�,,icnt. An 131S Jda/lis not] )-uplired uIldcr ITY1 4 3. 21C. 030 (2) (C*) . Tids . c1ccision 1'.'as made after rcview by 11)c lead ;10011-1), Ur. L, CUlMlacd C11C.Cklist and Other j.11fol-111(ition on file with tile lerid n(,oncy. z> Responsible Offid.,11 JAn Tanaka POSiti0l)/T it.10 Research Assistant C\ Date June 20, 1979- sif"natur at, ,LERK CIVIC CENTEFZ . EDMOND$, WA 98020 U wo 6-4 Pi CY K.10 EXCISE TAX REQUIRED Ft IC/ Z 88 KE 'County T e Di7pu-ty 0 C3 ED C Cj E 00 FORM L57R Quit Claim Deed (CORPORATE FORM) THE GRANTOR CITY OF EDMONDS, a municipal corporation for and inconsideration of Extinguishment of portion of easement conveysand quit claims to Rene VanLoveren and Dia . na L. VanLo'veren and their heirs and assigns the following described real estate, situated in the County of SNOHOMISH State of Washington including any i . nterest therein which grantor may hereafter acquire TNis instrument is given to release and relinquish that portion of the easement established in the recording -of the Plat of Pine Ridge Estates, according to the Plat thereof recorded in Volume 43 of Plats, page 114, records of Snohomi.sh County, Washington, described as follows: Beginning.at the Southwest cQr'h.er of Lot 9 of Pine Ridge Estates; thence East along the South line of Lot.9 for 1,Sfeet; thence North 2401511211 East to a point which is 50.27 feet South of the Nor-h line of said Lot 9 being the true point of beginning of this description; thence continuing North 24015112" East for 3 feet; thence Southerly parallel with the Westerly line of Lot 9 for 3 feet; thence Easterly in a straight line for 2.feet to the -true point of beginning. The Northwest corner of the existing house on Lot 9 of Pine Ridge Estates 0croaches onto the 10-foot wal.kway and waterl-ine easement as established in the Plat of Pine Ridge Estates, and the deletion of this 2 foot by 3 foot portion of said easement will eliminate the house encroachment. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, said corporation has caused this instrument to be executed by its proper officers a 2 and itoprpd2jU seal to ereunto affixed this L_j 1--kn 15th day of June, 1988. C:) 4Z _5 t job t .. S ............ . ...... .......................... CD By...... ......... ... .... ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........... ................................ CQ L4j 1'2 XYAkX4X L By........ ...... . .... ................... ........ STA�Xj OVir ON, City -Clerk $kXNX*X CO ss. mis� Sr t County of��S mish On this th day. of June 1988 before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, duly commissioned and sworn, personally appeared and known Mayor kX0$kkKt and C i ty Cl erk&ecxocw, respectively, of the City of Edmonds, thpoeq'% ti -Lbat executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged the said instrument to be the free and ora, ion 6TY.Itct 'and' --deed of said corporation, for the uses an d purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that G I itutiXorized to 'execute the said instrument and that the seal affixed is the cotporate seal of said A Wilotsj mr,.hand land official seal hereto affixed th d year first above written. Y"/ ............... 6 .... ....... Notary Public 'n nd for the State, of 4 residing at 8.8.0623 0244' My COMMLSVON R72 Ve'-S-1 PAGE 18 �74 CW' Y _._O F---r- D M 021 D S* Engineering Requirements f�r T)Iats and Subdi%7isions NAME: Pine Ridge Estates FILE MO. P-6-79 OLI-11 12 p.rn'D REO'D PPIOR TO W/BLDG. RON D VICINITY: 202nd Street SW and 84th Ave. RECORDING PERMIT POST'ED COMPLETED Right -of -Way - No dedication requilned on existing streets X 2. Paving and Curbs in Public 2. X right -of -way: Inprovement and widening to feet total that adjacent Portion of 202nd and 24 feet avement s/gutters on with 50 feet r/w required for 84th Place with cur 3. Turn Around: both sides of street 3. r 36 ft. radius of pavenient required X 4. Sidewalk & Planting Strip: 5 ft. si*.,Aalk required on E.side of 84th Pl.; al�o, 5 ft. pathvay X from south end of irrproved 84th Ave. W south to Fine Ridge Park 5. Access Easements: 5. None required X 6. Water Main s: Connection To City 6. requ�red. Construct 6" D.I. water X main to connect 202nd St. system to 204th St s7stem al ng 84th P1 W 7. Fire Hydrants: (Per Fire Code) 7. X 8. Sewers or Septic TaAks: 8. Connection to City Sanitary sewer required X 9.- Drainage: a. Submit for approval plans and 9. X install public storm facilities., b. Submit and obtain approval of site drainage plan per Ord. 1924 X 10. Utility Easements and Access 10. thereto: 7' easement on each lot f�onting 84th Place West and easemeut for water ma . 'n extensio X Underground Wiring: To be provide'T in accordance with Ordinance' 41387 Street Lighting shall also be pro- vided wit� the necessary streetliqllt standars and underground wiring con- .nection. X W9 street -lights required on 84t Place W EN(IINEERING REQUIREMENTS -1 PLATS PRIOR TO TLDG. BOND 0 0" �kND SUBDIVISIONS RECORDING t_PJ-1IT PnSTED COMPLETED 12. Excavation and Grading: Exca- 12. vation and Grading shall conform to the requirements outlined in X Chapter 70 of the Uniform Building Code., 13. Public Improvements Bond (see 13. page three) letter required by .Till)z 18 1979 Z1 days afterhear.!:ng 14. Monuments -(Per Section 12.10.120) Locate or install at intersection of 202nd Sttow SW & 84th Pl. W and in proximity of cul-de-sac. X 15. As-Builts: Required at completior15. of each phase of construction 16. 2.2% Inspection fee 16. ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS & COMMENTS: a a X b. Approved Plat required showing b. lots, easements, section, town- ship & range, etc. X C. chkd memo Edmhdids pvq A* nn�n on/Oonceri p �� b 1 u t u i e 4 r ents. d. d. e. e. CITY ENGINEER OF EDMONDS DATE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, ENGINEERING DIVISION The Engineering requirements have been completed and the subdivision can be recorded. - Authroized for recording by: Date: Z.NGIANEERING RLQ0IREMENTS FOR Pe' AND SUHDIVT,`�J Page Three ENGINLRING ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS H Section 12.10.060 (B), (4) Edmonds City Code Anplici.Ition and Fces: Pl'i'l-ic In,- ' cection Fee - An inspection fee. in the amount of 2. 2 percent of tho -estimated c0_nstruct:io;1q c�:q-m for tile public improvements shall be provided subsequent to th-� approval of the devellooment an,] engineer- ing plans by the Engineering Department. In accordance with the platting rules and regulations of tlh�� F-Imonds CiLY the sponsor, or the applicant shall advise, tile City Engincor, in writing ...,ithin 21 th,�, hearing da ' te, the method of assuring performanc'e for the installation of rc_-qu.i.r(-d irn,.�rove . ments. Improvements: Improvements to provided bv the developer shall conform to Section 12.10.050 of the Edmonds City Code and to'the foregoing list'of engineering requirements: Alternate method of providing tile improvements are as follows: 1. By furnishing the City of Edmonds w�th perfarrn,inc�! 7,,7 .1 t f.-I C. 4 - n -!e r Ci `nr.in, T, in which assurance is given the City that the install,ltion of tile ji� ni mi mi be carried out as provided in Section 12.10.050 o� tile Cit,; Code. Tht_ bond shall cover 110 percent of the Engineers' estimate of puDlic works and iitiliv., imni-ove_ ments. 2. By actual installation of imorovements L in accordance witli the provisions oF 7. * -c on 12. 10. 050 and in accordance with the installation requirements and* under the sur)erv.is,.on of the City Engineer. Regardless of the method emploved '-,y the develoDnr for the ins t.al ]_,.at -ion of "No improvements shall be finally accepted by the City of Edmonds until t�lle F,.,rnishes the City witha bond in the amount of 15 percent oF,the cost or- sai,l to f-u.9rantee said improvements against defects in workmanship and/or materials for a' period of* two (2) years from the date of such final acceptance." Also, before final acceptance, an as -built drawing of s.ite improvements shall 11�c suh.mitted by the developer's engineer and approved by the CitV Engineer'. Convenant: Owners, and all persons having any present or suhsen.ut-nt o-�-:nershin interest in these lands, and the successors and assigns of owners or other parties having an-, fzaid interest, hereby agree that the City of Edmonds shall. Ine held har'm1ess in all 1. rc.7�c.cts from any and all claims for damages for injunctive relief ..ihich nia-,! he I SL no,,; or in the future to adjacent land or improvements by reason of the . cons truct ion , cp(�ration and maintenance of tile drainage system, and hereby waive and release tile Citv oF e�*Imon,,!s from any and all claims for damages, excluding damage caused soleiv by an act or omission of said City and injunctive relief which the owners, or their sUccessors or assi.cns', . them- selves have now or in the future by reason of the construction, mairienance and operation of said drainage system. The City Engineer will review plans for, improvements, prior 'to the start of construcLioll. Notify the City Engineer of the schedule of construction prior to comm,.�nci.11,7 i.jor,:. (1qO WORK WILL BE UNDERTAKEN IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY UNTIL AUTHORIZED BY THE ENGINEERINIG DEPARTMENT.) If you have any quesitons concerning the above, please contact the City.Enj.-;ineer's Office. (R 11/15/78) 0 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL. BVIRONMENTAL P'SSESSMEN-1 FILL # -7y q. P ROP ONENT: Z) i Old, C? m-e*_ke�t C�.� Ka" H",Q� 14f_� EXISTING USE: 0 wo 0-d' to,-� ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS FROM PROPOSAL: SOILS/TOPOGRAPHY - M444�wvcqA to 0, WATER/DRAINAGE -to& 4\ V)'iiL&rZaa4<_ m-- 8 U1, Wdl ko"..0— a- AIRjaU1*LIf'Y' ko."s-ie't +0 CAA a-7o a.,� e0-64'%%f*Q� S C 0� AJ 0, S 0 t�Ub* el 6 44matao4ea, CIRCULATION 1-7 JW�ji Wi*t% Ar-7r. b-':S 1A';d 64eOlf<— )36 iv r7o A.r.'D." &ve4- V, --� ev� I 1*4 6te_ VEGETATION - To-,Qzet be— lot 6�� ECON014IC I TA CITY SERVICES S eAA) &A.) P1 ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS: P1. (L' c'Jawe- i 1-�Rav-A ,,0 12-c- C,4 X There will be certain environmental impacts but they do not constitute a signif- fcant adverse impact on the environment and no environmental impact statement will be required. There will be significant adverse impacts on the environment and an environmental impact statement will be required. I I There will be certain impacts on the environment however i't is necessary to obtain more information before a declaration of significance or non -significance is made. �41A a __ � _0_�o - x CIOTLANfttR DATE r!A I 7r