24005 74TH AVE W (3).pdfOD15
I I
tN I
04
Too
DATE 27
FEE
CITY OF EDMONDS
RECT
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
APO'S
APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE
HEARING DATE:
Z 10-
TJ-D
AaAj
jr,
APPLICAN a );�ZJV/h,ADDRESS 'V 0 -0 'S
L
17
ZIP A!E�&Oncj.5 9&-02=0 PHONE/
CITY & A 7 Ed
INDICATE TYPE OR DEGREE OF INTEREST IN PROPERTY Q alne r
LOCATION OR ADDRESS OF PROPERTY VO 0 6-- 7M 4� 0 n 0/ -S..
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY 4 J-pt A eA e
VARIANCE REQUESTED:
" e7 & a,
FOR'OFF.ICE USE ONLY
46W
USE ZONE: - IZ
Ak
ZONING ORDINANCE REQUIREMENT: g�ja,
Ac-
60
STATE OF WASHINGTON) ss.
COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH)
00 OF OWMW
POW" BWK,
0h
Signature of Appli
Representative
On this date, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for the Slate
of Washington, duly commissioned and sworn, personally appeared /51�- ,
who, being duly sworn, on his/her oath deposes and says that (s)he has prepared
and read the attached statements and has acknowledged to me that the recititations
contained therein are true, and has signed this instrument as his/her free and
voluntary act and deed for the purposes therein mentioned.
Subscribed and sworn to before me this ?J0 day of 19SO
0, It: f,
Notary P i d for the Stat of Washington,
�c2
residing at
DECLARATIONS OF APPLICANT
Please answer all questions
1. What are the physical characteristics, (i.e. topography, shape
of lot, etc.) which create a hardship for you in regard to
development of your property?
.I
1 .7/7 /
2. How does your property differ from other property in the same
vicinity?
3. Will this variance be detrimental to the public or damaging to
other property or improvements in the vicinity?
A+ -I --A 'C-A --e— ce le-.2-4-1 e r -S UZ)
4. What hardships will result to you if the variance is not granted?
Will these hardships have been caused by your own action?
a
U
5. Can you make reasonable use of your property without the variance?
.01 go
of iRMOM I
I
(j5*r5r
4
a
e#v r4of
momm
0
4ol,
7
IT
'IT
IVA? glor
ITT,
0
H0 L&S e
L9 I lop
Ott,
^A
973
TZ
Sys Oro
9
9
Iske 84LL1N(jtkI'IO-'1
. I 1 7 )1-, , . �.14; . . . I , 1 0 1 %, ^0 0 p I Nk.
Tr -A�"d
;lt
7d9 I er -/4/ o#
st" 00 am lit?
3
OW
LIT,
It4'
t
Record of Fin,dings o djuswnen
of P6&4�,a 2��
finds in the case
o f Adjustment for the ci ty of tdmonds
The Board /0 e)
e at 4a��
F i I No. V,,,,2�& request for varianc
)b the following:
e
ents, and Affidavits attesting to sam
1. That notice was given according to Code requirem
are in the file.
have/4**o_vAA been met.
2. That the foregoing set forth Standards and Criteria each
3. In addition that
4. Therefore, the request for variance is De*k-d/Grantedo subject to the following special
conditiolls:
_rmit is not obtained
Section 12.16.110 "----and -if a building permit and/or occupancy a M
ro-F_f1_ies6bieFt_�roperty- within one year from the date of the Bo rd's decision, the con
ditional use permit or variance shall be automatically null and void.---"
6. Decision shall be effective on:.
(Date)
CIA D*
DATA
Date of Hearing:
Date of
Application:_Z�
Date of
Publication:
<) Continuances:
Date of
Posting:
Date of
Appeal from
Decision of the Board:
ent
e �nt
ustm
of us
&Secreta eyV4,oart�
Council Members of Edmonds
C t f Edmonds,
i. ' y o
Washington
V.
Re:. Donald.molvik's New Building
24005-74th A�ve. W.
shington
Edmonds, Wa
Dear Council Members:
We,
'1"S i
do not object, in any waY, to the construction of Mr.
d we feel that he
new building located at the above address,, an
iance that he has applied for.
should be granted the var
cting of this building in no way hinders
We feel that the constru
AL z TO
ZYT�i bF E098M
XONING M%
oil
14,i ,
OWL
July 7, 1980
':Council Members of Edmonds
city of Edmonds
Washington
Re: Donald Molvik's New Building
.24005-74th Ave. W.
Edmonds, Wash ington
Dear Council Members:
U
ZA
We $ACI
do not object, in any way, to the
cons 'truction of Mr. Molvik's
new building located at the above
addressq an d we feel that he
should be granted the variance that
he has applied for.
We feel that the constructing of
this building in no way hinders.
the beauty -of the lake, and surrounding areas.
Sincerely yours,
July 7, 1980
Council Members of Edmonds
Pity of Edmonds,
Washington
�6: Dona'*lA Molvik's New Building
24005 74th Ave. W.
Edmonds Washington
Dear Council Members:.
We
- T
LILA-st
do not object, in any way, to the
construction of Mr. Molvik's
new building' located at the above
address,
and we feel that he
should be granted the variance that he has
applied for.
We feel that the constructing of this building in no way hinders
the beauty of the lake, and surrounding area.
Sincerely yours,
rz,4. k �-,
2 IAK%
9 MI
July 7, 1980
Council Members of Edmonds
City of Edmonds,
Washington
Pit
Re: Donald Molvik's New Building
24005 74th Ave. W.
Edmonds,Washington
Dear Council Members:
L
W
0
do not object, in any way, -to the
construction
of Mr. Molvik's
new building located at the above
address, and
we feel that he
should be granted.the variance that
he has applied for.
We feel that the constructing -of
this building
in no'way hinders
the beauty of the lake, and surrounding areas.
Sincerely yours,
J& ?.'680
ru=*x
A
July 7, 1980
Council Members of Edmonds
City of Edmonds,
Washington
Re: Donald Molvik's New Building
24005-74th Ave. W.
Edmonds, Washington
Dear Council Members:
We, w wws 4 1 MU".0^1 2 3 73 74('e &J
do not object, in any wayj to the construction of Mr. Molvik's
::V"
new building located at the above address, and we feel that he
should be granted"the variance that he has applied for.
We feel that the constructing of this building in no way hinders
the beauty of the lake, and surrounding areas. It
Sincerely yours,
,NL 26taft
MIN
July 7, 1980
J
Council Members of Edmonds
City of Edmonds,
Washington
Re: Donald Molvik4s New Building
24005 - Ath Ave. W.
Edmonds- waghinatnn
Wx OF
July 7, 1980
rV.1
"A
Council Members of Edmonds
city of Edmonds,
Washington
Re: Donald Mo Ivik's New Building
Oc'
.4
24005-74th Ave. Wo
Edmonds, Washington
Dear council Members:
we,Le Roa LOiA I/iU
f"nd
L4;t.A ve- _4._Wa
do not object, in any way, to the
construction of Mr Molvik's
V�"
new building located at the above
address and we feel that h e
should be granted the variance that
he has applied for..
We feel that the constructing of.this
building in no wa y hinders
the beauty of the lake, and surroun ding areas.
Sincerely yours,
07RBO
13f EDSIOW
.1"tim MT.
vs___
m
»
Edmonds
Council Members of
City of Edmonds,
Washington
vik's New Building
Re: Donald Mol
24005-74th Ave. W.
Edmonds, Washington
Dear Council Members:
we 10'"o-
to the construction of Mr. Molvik's
do not object, in any way,
address, and wefeel that he
ted at the above
new building loca
should be granted the variance that he has applied for
of this building in no way hinders
Nef.eel that the constructing
and surrounding areas.
the beauty of the lake,
Sincerely You'74
_
July 7, 1980
Council Members of Edmonds
City of Edmonds
Washington
Re: Donald Molvik's New Building
24005-74th Ave. W.
Edmonds, Washington
Dear council Members:
We,
do not object, in any way, to the construction of Mr. Molvik's
building located at the above address, and we feel that he
new
should be granted the variance that he has applied for.
We feel that the constructing of this building in no way hinders
the beauty of the lake, and surrounding areas.
Sincerely yours,
-C
All
July 7, 1980
if
Council Members of Edmonds
City of Edmonds
Washington
Re: Donald Molvik's New Building
24005"74th Ave. W.
Edmonds, Washington
C'l Members:
Dear Cou 1
We
VZ
4./
do not object, in any way, to the construction of Mr. Molvik's
-41
new building located at the above address, and we feel that he
should be granted the variance that he ha p I plied for.
s a
We feel that the constructing of this building in no way hinders T.
the.beauty of the lake, and surrounding areas.
Sincerely yours,
PlY OF L";,*I-JKDS
KANNIN6 DIPT,
July 7, 1980
Council Members of Edmonds
City of Edmonds
Washington
Re: Donald Molvik's New Building
A ..�. T-T
new Duilding.located at the above address, and we feel that he
should be granted the variance that he has applied for.
We feel that the constructing of this building in no way hinders
the beauty of the lake, and surrounding areas.
Sincerely yours, Uj to L—
"rr rawt)NI)s
�I.ANNINQ DVPT.
V , I
Washington
Re: Donald Molv ik's New Building
24005 74th Ave. W-
. . . . . .
Edmondsp Washington
7m;
'l M b
Dear Cou 1 em erSj
We
....................
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . i .........
do not objects in any way, to the construction of Mr. Mo Ivik's
IF
located at the above a ddressq and we feel that he
new.building
should be granted the va rianpe that he has applied -for.
We f eel that the constructing of this build ing in no'way hinders
the beauty of the lake's and surrounding areas.
Sincerely yourss
a a 3180
� OF E&NOM
LI NING am.
NOTICE OF HEARING PETITION
FOR VARIANCE - XMWJMWX=)pXy=
BY EDMONDS BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
All interested p
20th day
date for hearing
for a variance -
footaize 'allow
at 24005 74th
said property bei
?rsons are hereby notified that Wednesday, the
)f Au 3,us t 19 80 * has been set as the
Petition filed by Donald & Joyce mpiviL-
x5WkbdWQ4K:Q=)P=ict to exceed square
ed for accesory buildinjzs
Avenue West
ng zoned RSW-12
4F*4-4Xf4M:6*JC:K
Said hearing will be at 7:30 P.M. in the Council Chambers of the
Civic Center, Edmonds, Washington before the Board of Adjustment
and all interested persons are invited to appear.
IRENE VARNEY MORAN
City Clerk, City of Edmonds
FILE NO: V-26-80
PUBLISH:- 8-2-80
STATE OF WASHINGTON,
COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH,
B - 2 - I
S&
Affidavit of Pu6lication
The undersigned, being first duly sworn on oath deposes and sa'y
that she is Principal Clerk of the EVERETT HERALD, a daily newE
paper printed and published in the City of Everett, County of Snohc
mich and State of Washinaton! that said newspaper is a newspapE
I
of general circulation in said County and State; that said newspaper
has been approved as a legal newspaper by order of the Superior
Court of Snohomish County, and that the notice .....................................
NOTICE OF HEARING
.................................................................................................................................
a printed copy of which is hereunto attached, was published in said
newspaper proper and not in supplement form, in the regular and,
entire edition of said paper on the following days and times, namely:
AUG. 29 1980
.................................................................................................................
and that said newspaper was regularly distributed to its subscribers
during all of said period.
................................ ............... !? ...................... . .........................................................
Principal Clerk
Subscribed and sworn to before me this ..... 4.th ...........
AUGUST 80
dayof .. ................................ 19 .........
----------- ...........
............. ................ ............
otary Public in and for the State of Washington,
h
++ Q
Ay -0
4�
residing at Everett, Snohomish County.
I
FILE NO. V-26-80
APPLICANT Donald Molvik
AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING
STATE OF WASHINGTON
ss.
COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH
Tina Zarelli
being
first duly sworn,
on oath deposes and says:
d
That on the ay
of a"
the attached
Notice of Public'of Hearing
was mailed as required to adjacent
p roperty owners, the names
of which were
provided by the
applicant.
S i gn�e-d�
Subscribed and sworn'to before me thi(S-Z—"y
of
19—yo
czl�
Notary Public. 3-n and for Lhe
State of Washington
Residing at
. I k I
T" 7m
THE_ tltr-- WILL HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING
ON THE FOLLOWING APPLICATION:
-Weda ea r 4 f I
FILE NO., 'R de_.,-Ao eke-p-ed,
a, re, ro dta-, a o
PROPERTY ADDRESS AND LOCATION
ZONE DISTRICT MV5 Wn /0"L
THE HEARING WILL BEGIN AT '7: -30 M., IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS
OF THE EDMONDS CIVIC CENTER, 250 FIFTH AVENUE NORTH.
IF YOU WISH TO COMMENT ON THIS PROPOSAL, YOU MAY COME TO THE HEARING AND SPEAK. YOU
MAY ALSO WRITE A LETTER STATING YOUR VIEWS WHICH WILL BE CONSIDERED AT THE HEARING.
PLEASE ADDRESS THE LETTER TO THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT AND INCLUDE THE
ABOVE FILE NUMBER.
IF THE ITEM IS CONTINUED TO ANOTHER HEARING BECAUSE THE AGENDA IS NOT COMPLETED, OR
FURTHER INFORMATION IS NEEDED, THE DATE OF THE CONTINUED HEARING WILL BE ANNOUNCED
ONLY AT THE MEETING.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION MAY BE -OBTAINED AT THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT,
505 BELL STREET, EDMONDS (PHONE 775-2525, EXT. 227).
THE REMOVAL, MUTILATION, DESTRUCTION. OR
CONCEALMENT OF THIS NOTICE BEFORE THE DATE
WAIOININ(037' 0-F THE HEARING IS A MISDEMEANOR PUNISHABLE
BY FINE AND IMPRISONMENT.
THIS NOTICE MAY BE REMOVED AFTER 6-c�Q, SbQ
r
STATE OF WASHINGTON
ss.
COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH
T)" 'R r%T.7m n -n heinn first dulv sworn
on.oath deposes and says:
day of i the
That on the
attached Notice of Public Hearing was posted as prescribed by Ordinance,
and in any event, in the Post Office and Civic Center and where applic
able, on or near the subject property.
Signed-46a
Subscribed and sworn to before me thi S--7� a y o f
No ary ublic in and for the State of
Washington residing at
PIANNFR'S VARIANCE REVIEW FORM
APPLICANT:— Donald movik ZONING:-Rqw-i 9
ADDRESS: 24005 74th Ave W
VARIANCE . REQUESTED:— -buil. pxc!ptarl thp req11J'rPd
sq. ft. reg irement by 12 sq. ft, Qnn sqft,
ZONING CODE REQUIREMENT: f_Q r a c
OTHER PERTINENT FACTS:
VARIANCE CRITERIA - Section 12.16.100
1. Does this amount to a rezone? No
nces not generally applicable to other.,
2.(a) Are there conditions and/or circumsta
lands in the same district?
ng code deprive the property owner of rights
(b) Would strict enforcement of the zoni me district?
es in the sa
commonly enjoyed by other properti
cial conditions result from the actions of the applicant?_ya,--App1!.r-ant
3. Do the spe
A
An
constru e h without
4Z 4- r
th 1ii1dina--w- 19 Ba
th
ry hardships and practical difficulties in carrying out the
4. Are there unnecessa
code? Sin
provisions of the zoning otage.
h
Drove cost
f the variance be detrimental to the health, safety, or welfare
5. Will the granting o
of property owners in the vicinity? N,-
11 make possible the reasonable use of land?
6. Is this the minimum variance that wi
7. Will the granting of the variance generally be in harmony and compatible with this
zoning code?_
Planner's Variance Review 12/77
'CITY OF E93MONDS
CIVIC CENTER * EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 96M 9 (206) 775-2525
COMMUNITY -DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
DATE:_ September 23 - 1980
TO: Mr. & Mrs. Donald Molvik
24005 74th Avenue West
Edmonds, WA 98020
TRANSMITTING: Board of Adjustment Minutes
RE: V-26-80
AS YOU REQUESTED:
FOR,YOUR INFORMATION: XX
AS WE DISCUSSED.:
FOR APPROVAL:
FOR YOUR FILE:
REVIEW AND COMMENT:
COVLIENT AND RETURN:
MINUTES OF MEETING:_August 20, 1980
REMARKS:
PLANNING DIVISION
minimum variance to make possible reasonable use of the land and he noted
that even if 79th should be widened, which is unlikely, it*would not affect
this property substantially. He felt granting of the variance would be in
harmony with the zoning code, and he recommended approval. Mrs. Derleth
noted that there is an obvious bulldozer track along one side of the property
to some sort of development behind, which raised the question of what would
happen in the future back there. Mr. Bowman responded that the property
owner is planning to relocate a house on that property to another location
on the same site and there have been a number of proposals for that property,
but there are no current plans to widen the right-of-way beyond the 20'
which exists. He said the property is held in common ownership and there
had been a proposal to do a one-way loop system through it and develop a
PRO but those plans fell through, and it now appeared that if anything does
develop it will be three single-family homes on a one-way loop system to
serve that back piece of property. The bulldozing was for the new driveway
to the place where the existing home was to be relocated which is a building
lot in the center. The public portibn of the hearing was opened.
James Flaherty, 5921 172nd Pl. S.W., Lynnwood, said he had heard by word of
mouth that the owner of this property intended developing two additional
lots besides the lots in the back. He did not think traffic for three
houses would overburden the road, but he protested to anything over three.
He said it would impact the people who will live in the house he intends
building on the corner. He said another problem is that the depth of the
sewers is such that gravity flow would not be possible from the development
in the back. He felt this particular right-of-way probably should have
been a private road instead of an extension of 79th. The public portion of
the hearing was closed.
Mr. Hatzenbuhler observed that what was going to happen in the back of this
lot was not the issue. Mrs. Derleth commented that this was a good sized
house and she had not heard evidence as to why it had to be 4 1/2' into the
setback, and she was not sure this was a minimum variance. The public
portion of the hearing was reopened.
The applicant said most model building codes allow 15' setbacks on corner
lots if it is not an arterial and in the public welfare. He said they try
to cut down the front and side yards and provide the most usable'space in
back, and the plan selected for this lot is ideal because they will be able
to save two old cedar trees on the lot. To get the plan on the lot they
needed the 4 1/2' variance for the section of house adjacent to the right-
of-way. He said the house on the other side of the right-of-way is approxi-
mately 50' from the property line, with a lot'of greenbelt around it, so he
felt this structure would not encroach on the neighbors in any way. He
provided a drawing of a typical plan of what he is planning to construct
and he said the home would sell somewhere in the high $80,OOD+. The public
portion of the hearing again was closed.
Mrs. Derleth considered the various points --the fact that it was unlikely
that 79th would be developed further, it would serve as an access easement
more than a full-scale City street, plus the fact that usually the setbacks
from each corner provide some relief from sight obstruction --but that was
not an issue here. She felt the cedar trees would be the big obstruction.
Mrs. Medina commented that the plans provided are good, with the kinks
worked out and they are inexpensive. But she said that when you have a
lot that & plan does not fit then you need to think about a plan to fit
the lot. She said it is a question of economics--$500 for an architect or
$35 for a variance. Mr. Hatzenbuhler did not think a property owner should
be penalized on a corner lot, and especially on this road. MR. HATZENBUHLER
MOVED, SECONDED BY MR. LERAAS, TO APPROVE V-25-80 BECAUSE HE FELT IT WAS A
MINIMUM VARIANCE TO MAKE BETTER USE OF THE PROPERTY AND BECAUSE IT WOULD
NOT BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE OF THE COMMUNITY.
MOTION CARRIED. A short recess was announced.
V-26-80 DONALD AND JOYCE MOLVIK - Variance to exceed square footage allowed for
accessory buildings at-24005 74th Ave. W. (RSW-12)
A slide was shown of the accessory structure. A complaint had been received
that this building was being erected without a building permit. That was
FDMONES BRARD OF ADJYJ;MENT
age - ugust 2 - 0
confi med and a stop -work order was issued, but the building was almost
completed when the application was made for a variance. The allowable
accessory building area is 1,000 sq. ft. and the two accessory buildings on
this lot totaled 1,086.65 sq. ft. Mr. Bowman reviewed the variance criteria.
It would not amount to a rezone. There were no conditions not generally
applicable to other properties in the same district. Strict enforcement of
the zoning code would not deprive the property owner of righs commonly
enjoyed by others in the same district. Special conditions were the result
of actions of the applicant as the applicant constructed the building
without a building permit and discovered that the building was 86.65 sq.
ft. too large. Since the building already was erected it may be costly to
reduce the building to the required square footage, constituting practical
difficulties in carrying out the provisions of the zoning code. Granting
of the variance would not be detrimental to the health, safety, or welfare
of property owners in the vicinity. Mr. Bowman felt this was a minimum
variance to make possible reasonable use of the land and that granting of
the variance would be compatible with the zoning code. He said he had a
problem making a recommendation because the accessory building was constructed
without a building permit. Mr. Smith said the building does not impede
the sanitary sewer easement running across the lot. Letters had been
received from adjacent property owners stating they did not object to the
variance request. The public portion ofthe hearing was opened.
Don Molvik said he had acquired twelve letters from his neighbors indicating
they had'no objections to the buildings. He said his home was built in
1923 and the garage is only big enough to hold two cars. They are finishing
the basement of the house and they had no place to store their boat. Part
of the new building will be a greenhouse. He had poured the slab six
months ago and went no further at that time. He said he cannot attach the
garage to the house. He built the new building to match the house with a
tile roof and cedar. Mrs. Medina said he was aware of the permit procedure
in Edmonds and she asked why he had not obtained a building permit. He
responded that he just did not take the time to get it. He said since he
runs his bwn company he does not have much time but that was no excuse.
Mrs. Medina observed that the accessory building looks like a nice guest
cottage --that it has nice lines.and is beautiful. He responded that his
house has four bedrooms and three bathrooms, so he does not need a guest
house, and that even his garage has a stained glass -window in it and all
his windows are thermopane, including the greenhouse windows. Mrs. Medina
asked if he realized the load he was putting on the Building Department to
inspect it at this point instead of at the proper stages. She admonished
him that he is a knowledgeable man, doing business in this town, and that
he knows the requirements regarding permits. He responded that the Building
Inspector had no complaints with the building. The public portion of the
hearing was closed.
Mr. Hatzenbuhler commented that if Mr. Molvik had made his building smaller
he would not be here, and the concern was whether to let it exceed the
1,000 sq. ft. requirement for accessory buildings. He noted that none of
the neighbors objected, and they would be the most affected, and he said
the complainant must not care too much or he would be here. He was in
favor of approving it. Mr. Leraas said the only problem he had was legalizing
the permit after they were so far along with the construction, and Mrs. .
Medina said if he had received his permit in the first place he would not
need a variance. Mrs. Derleth said she probably would not grant 86 sq. ft.
over the 1 000 sq. ft. if she were looking at it before it was built and
she could Nsign the building to remove the 86 sq. ft. CHAIRMAN BYRD THEN
MOVED, SECONDED BY MR. HATZENBUHLER, TO APPROVE V-26-80, SAYING THE MOTION
WAS MADE'STRICTLY ON THE MERITS OF THE BUILDING ITSELF AND THE SIZE OF THE
BUILDING AND HE DID NOT APPROVE OF THE APPLICANT'S NOT GETTING A BUILDING
PERMIT, BUT NEVERTHELESS HE FELT THE CRITERIA FOR THE VARIANCE HAD BEEN
MET --MARGINALLY. HE SAID THERE ARE PRACTICAL HARDSHIPS AND DIFFICULTIES AT
THIS STAGE, NAMELY REBUILDING OR REMOVING THE EXISTING STRUCTURES. HE FELT
IT WOULD NOT BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE PUBLIC OR INJURIOUS TO THE AREA TO ALLOW
THIS, AND IT APPEARED TO HIM TO BE A MINIMUM VARIANCE AND GENERALLY IN
HARMONY WITH THE ZONING CODE. THE MOTION CARRIED, WITH MRS. MEDINA AND
MRS. DERLETH VOTING NO.
EDMONDS BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
Page 6 - August 20, 1980