24025 104TH PL.pdfa
CITY OF EDMONDS BARBARA FAHEY
MAYOR
250 5TH AVENUE NORTH - EDMONDS, WA 98020 - (206) 771-0220 FAX (206) 771-0221
HEARING EXAMINER
'C�'St. 1W3
FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND DECISION
OF THE HEARING EXAMINER
CITY OF EDMONDS
APPLICANT: Sheila & Kasey Knowlen
CASE NO.: V 97-55
LOCATION: The subject property is located at 24025 104th Place West (see
Exhibit A, Attachment 1)..
APPLICATION: Application for a Variance to reduce the required street setb ack
(from the east property - line, 104th Avenue West) from 15-feet * to
20-feet to allow the construction of an approximate 936 square foot
detached accessory garage with an additional approximate 208
square foot attached carport (see Exhibit A, Attachments 2 through
5).
REVIEW PROCESS: Variance, Hearing Examiner conducts public hearing and issues
final decision.
MAJOR ISSUES:
a.
Compliance with Edmonds Community Development Code
(ECDC)
Chapter 16.20 (RS - SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL).
b.
Compliance with Edmonds Community Development Code
(ECDC)
Chapter 20.85 (VARIANCES).
c.
Compliance with Edmonds City Code (ECDC) Chapter
5.30,120
(VARIANCES).
d.
Compliance with Edmonds Community Development Code
(ECDC)
Section 20.100.010 (HEARING EXAMINER, PLANNING ADVISORY
BOARD AND CITY COUNCIL REVIEW).
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATION AND DECISION:
Staff Recommendation: Deny
Hearing Examiner Decision: Deny
PUBLIC HEARING:
After reviewing the official file which included the Planning Division Staff Advisory Report; and
after visiting the site, the Hearing Examiner conducted a public hearing on the application. The
hearing on the application was opened at 10:01 am., June 5, 1997, in the Community Services
0 Incorporated Au_qust 11, 1890 a
Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan
0-
_3
Hearing Examiner Decision
Case No. V 97-55
Page 2
Conference Room, 250 5th Ave. N., Edmonds Washington, and closed at 10:33 am. Participants
at the public hearing and the exhibits offeQ and entered are listed in this report. A verbatim
z
<
recording of the hearing is available in the Planning Division.
LU
cc
HEARING
I M,
COMNENTS:
- i " - `1�11'
-j U1
�11
The following is a summary of the comments offered at the public hearing..
M LU!
LU
From the City:
—0
LU
Jeff Wilson reviewed the staff report for the setback variance, and recommended denial
of the application. He felt the proposal could be modified to allow a garage on the site.
:3
U. <
He said the depth of the structure could be reduced or the structure could be moved
toward the west to allow the garage to be built without the need for a variance.
z
From the Applicants:
Jane Jacobson, speaking on behalf of the applicants, said:
Us LU,
The applicants are willing to reduce the size of the structure from 36 feet in length
0
to 33 1/2 feet in length to provide a 7 V2 foot setback on the north side.
Ui
The existing house is 41 feet back from 104th Place West.
U-
Almost every house in the area has a garage closer than 25 feet to the street
(including the next door neighbor).
0
z
Only two garage doors am proposed and the rest of the space will be used for a
workshop.
The depth proposed is needed because the applicant has two pickups, but the rest
of the proposal can be modified to meet the minimum setback requirements.
0 The existing fence will come down and a privacy fence will be installed.
0 There will be no business conducted out of the house and garage.
0 The applicants want to keep space between the garage and the house for insurance
purposes.
From the Community:
Lavonne Layman, neighbor, wanted to know why the applicants wanted such a large
garage -
Jan Robinson, neighbor, felt the proposed garage.would be detrimen% to the
neighborhood.
Paul Smithers, neighbor, wanted to know which street would be used for access to the
garage.
W 7�
Hearing Examiner Decision
Case No. V 97-55
Page 3
II. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSLO&S
A. SITE DESCRIPTION
1. Site Development and Zoning:
a. Facts:
3.01
0
(1) Size and ShARe The subject property is approximately 9,375 square
Lui
i�E.
feet in area and generally rectangular in shape with approximately
I
J
75-feet of frontage on 104th Street SW, frontage on 104th Place
I I �_�
0,
1:3
West, and approximately 115-feet in depth along the north property
line and 135-feet in depth along the south property line which is
L 4c
adjacent to 241st Street Southwest (see Exhibit A, Attachments 3
and 4).
E
Z
(2) Land Use The subject property is cuffently developed with an
existing detached single-family residence (see Exhibit A, Attachment
J (at
(3) Zoning The subject site is zoned Single-Farrifly Residential - 8,000
square feet minimum lot size (RS-8) (see Exhibit 1).
LU 0
X
2. Neighboring Development and Zoning:
a. Facts:
U
(1) Nogh. The area is developed with single-family -residences and
zoned RS-8 (see Exhibit A, Attachment 1).
Z
(2) Louft- The area is developed with single-family residences and
zoned RS-8 (see Exhibit A, Attachment 1).
(3) Egg: The area is developed with single-family residences and zoned
RS-8 (see Exhibit A, Attachment 1).
(4) West: The area is developed with single-family residences and
zoned RS-8 (see Exhibit A, Attachment 1).
b. Conclusion Accessory structures are common with the development of
0
single-family residences.
B. STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT (SEPA)
1. a. Eacr The application is exempt from SEPA pursuant to WAC 197-11 -
800(l)(b)(i).
b. Conclusion: The applicant and the City have satisfied the requirements of
SEPA.
C. EDMONDS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE (ECDC) COMPLIANCE
1. a. Facts:
(1) Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Chapter
20.15B.180.A, states an applicant may request a variance from the
0
z
J
W
Ui
LL.
IB
Y
1*7C
AC
Hearing Examiner Decision
Case No. V 97-55
Pap 4
standards of this Chapter pursuant to the procedures set forth in
ECDC Chapter 20.85 (Variances). Chapter 20.85 of the ECDC sets
forth the mechanism whereby a provision of the Code may be varied
on a case -by -case basis if the application of the provision would
result in an unusual and unreasonable hardship.
ECDC Section 20.85.010 establishes the decisional criteria with
which a variance request must comply in order to be granted by the
Hearing Examiner. These criteria include: a special circumstance
must exist (special circumstances include: size, shape, topography,
location or surroundings of the property and public necessity for
public structures); no special privilege is granted; the proposal is
inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Code; the
proposal will not be detrimental; and, the proposal is the minimum
necessary to allow reasonable use of the subject property.
(3) Variance may be used to modify bulk standards. They may not be
used to modify use or procedural requirements.
(4) The applicants request to modify the minimum required street
setback requirement for the RS-8 zone from 25-feet to 20-feet for the
construction of an approximate 936 square foot detached accessory
building with attached carport (see Exhibit A, Attachments 2, 4 and
5).
(5) The setback requirements for the RS-8 zone, also require a minimum
7.5-foot setback from side property lines. The applicant has shown a
5-foot setback from the north property line which is a side setback,
but has not requestedl a variance for this setback. Therefore, the
proposed accessory structure does not meet the minimum required
setback from side property lines (see Exhibit A, Attachment 4).
(6) The subject property is also required to have a street setback of 25-
feet from the south property line, which is adjacent to 241st Street
Southwest. The proposed drawings for the accessory structure do
not provide a dimension for this setback (see Exhibit A, Attachment
4).
(7) The applicants declarations in response to the required review
criteria are contained on Exhibit A, Attachment 5.
(8) The applicant has not indicated what the proposed height of the
accessory structure will be. The maximum permitted height for an
accessory structure in an RS-8 zone is 15-feet above average
building grade.
b. Conclusions:
(1) Special Circumstances - Special circumstances do not exist on- the
subject property which would preclude the reasonable use of the
subject property as a single-family residence. The subject property
contains considerable developable area which the applicant could use
-77777777.7, �7-
AX
4-
without the necessity of being granted a variance. The need for the
variance appears to be directly related to the size of the proposed
accessory structure and not due to any specific constraints on the
placement of the proposed accessory structure related to some unique
feature of the property itself, which limits the options for the
applicant to enjoy reasonable of the site.
However, some case could be made regarding special circumstances
of the subject property related to the subject property having streets
abutting what would be traditionally considered the front property
line (104th Place West) and the rear property line (104th Street SW�
Typically, properties that tend to have two street setbacks are comer
lots. However, in this situation, the streets abutting the subject site
are opposite each other, which results in a pinching down effect
toward the center of the site. The site is large enough though to
accommodate a garage over 26 feet in depth if it is attached to the
house or a garage with a depth of 23 V2 feet if there is 5 feet of
clearance between the house and a detached garage.
(2) Special Privilege - Approval of the requested -variance would appear
to provide the applicant with a special privilege. The applicant's
have not provided any information to show that other properties in
the vicinity of the subject property have been granted similar
privileges. It is acknowledged that there are other garages in the
vicinity which are closer than 25 feet from the right -of -way.
However, those garages may have been built under different
regulations before those properties were annexed to the City of
Edmonds. That does noVerve as a basis for grant of a variance.
(3) Zoning Code and the Comorehensive Plan - The requested variance
is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan (see Section E below)
or the Zoning Code.
(4) Not Detrimental - Approval of the requested variance could result in
establishing a precedent in the neighborhood that when applied to
another property could be specifically detrimental to adjacent
property owners or the public as a whole.
(5) Minimum ftuired - It appears that there is sufficient vacant area on
the subject property whereby the applicant could construct a
narrower garage structure or place it in a manner that could comply
with the required setbacks.
Additionally, since the proposed structure appears to be of sufficient,
size to accommodate three bays plus an attached carport, the
proposed garage would appear to be somewhat larger than a typical
garage for a single-family residence.
1 0
z
(n
(A I
LU
.1
UJ
LL.
(n
z
0
0
LU
U.
W
z
E
3
K It
Hearing Examiner Decision
Case No. V 97-55
Page 6
Furthermore, the, depth of the garage could be reduced in depth and
still provide sufficient depth to park a vehicle and comply with the
minimum street setback requirements.
Therefore, the request as submitted does not appear to be the
minimum necessary to allow the applicant to maintain reasonable
use of the subject property.
D. XECIINICAL COMMITrEE
a. Eacts.
(1) The Engineering Division has submitted comments related to the
subject application, these comments are provided as Exhibit A,
Attachment 6.
(2) Even though , specific comments were not provided by. all
Departments or Divisions within the City, it is still the applicants
responsibility to comply with applicable City development
regulations at the time of any building permit submittal.
b. Conclusion The applicant should comply with all requirements placed on
the proposed development by other Departments/Divisions of the City.
E. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (ECDC)
1 . a. Lact- The subject property is designated as "Single Family Small Lot."
b. Conclusion The proposed use of the subject property is consistent with
the typical uses envisioned with single-family development, therefore, it is
consistent with the existing Comprehensive Plan Land use designation for
the subject site.
2. a. Eacts- The Comprehensive Plan, Residential Development section,
identifies goals and policies which relate to "Residential Developmene' in
the City. Specific goals and policies are discussed in detail below:
(1) Section B states as a goal of the City that: "High quality residential
development which is appropriate to the diverse lifestyles of
Edmonds residents should be maintained and promoted... "
(2) Page 31, subsection B.5.0 states, "Stable property values must not
be threatened by view, trafflc, or land use encroachments. "
(3) Page 3 1, subsection B.6 state, "Require that new residential
development be compatible with the natural constraints of slopes,
soils, geology, vegetation and drainage. "
b. Conclusion: The proposed development is inconsistent with the above
adopted goals and policies of the City for the development of residential
property in the City. The City should be particularly sensitive to this issue
in light of the fact that the applicant's request pertains to an accessory
structure and is not related to a request to seek relief from the required
setbacks to due to natural constraints of the property which wo, I uld
0
z
ff
Cr.
(n
LU
-J
W LL
Zu- 0
U.
z
UJ
0
0
La
LU fJ
Hearing Examiner Decision
Case No. V 97-55
Page 7
adversely affect the development of the site with.the primary use of a
single-family residence.
DECISION
Based upon the foregoing findings and conclusions, the request for a setback variance is denied.
Entered this 17th day of June, 1997, pursuant to the authority granted the Hearings Examiner
under Chapter 20. 100 of the Community Development Code of the City of Edmonds.
Ron McConnell
Hearing Examiner
The following is a summary of the deadlines and procedures for filing reconsideration's and
appeals. Any person wishing to file or respond to a recommendation or appeal should
contact the Planning Department for hirther procedural information.
REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION
Section 20.100.010.G allows for the Hearing Examiner to reconsider his decision or
recommendation if a written request is filed within ten (10) working days of the date of the
initial decision by any person who attends the public hearing and signs the attendance register
and/or presents testimony or by any person holding an ownership interest in a tract of land
which is the subject of such decision or recommendation. The reconsideration request must
cite specific references to the findings and/or the criteria contained in the ordinances
governing the type of application being reviewed.
Section 20.105.020.A & B describe how appeals of a Hearing Examiner decision or
recommendation shall be made. The appeal shall be made in writinz and shall include the
decision being appealed along with the name of the project and the date of the decision, the
name of the individual or group appealing the decision, their interest in the matA, and
reasons why the appellant believes the decision to be wrong. The appeal must be filed with
the Community Development Director within ten (10) working days after the date of the
decision being appealed.
V q1V
ly"
%p
Hearifig Ift'aminer Decision
5
Case No." V 974
Page 8
LAPSE OF APPROVAL
no building is
z Section, 20.,05.020.0 states,Unlesg the owner obtains. i�buildinj pe'rim .or,if
R required, substantially commences the use allowed within on6year fiom the date of approval,
�".the,'conditionalluse,perniit'sI all expi and be null:and, viiAd_ unless'the owner file
re es an
application for an extensionof the time before the expiration* date.'_
Cos go
NOTICE. TO COUNTY ASSESSOR
The property owner may as a result of the decision rendered by the Hearing Examiner request'
0 U.
0
Uj d chanke in Ahe valuation of the property by the, Snohomish County Assessors Office.
EXJHBIT:
Th6 fbIlowing exhibit was offered and entered into die record.
A. Planning Division Advisory Report
0
U=jj PARTIES oF RECORD:
Q
Sheila and Kasey Knowlen Lavonne Layman
LU '24025 6�h Place West 24119 105'h Place'West
Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020
Uj
Jan Robinson Paul Smithers
10523 24& Place S.W. 10316 240" S.W.
0
z Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020
Edmonds Planning Division
Edmonds Public Works Division
Edmonds Engineering Division
Edmonds Parks & Recreation Division
Edmonds Fire Department
UA
LL
LLA
Z
uo�
(1) 0,
(j) LAJ
LU X
-J I--
Ln Lo,
UJ
2 �:
I ti
LL <
Z P�
L)
0
LU LL
A
Ch
0
Z
CA
am
Lo
EIMON�S'IHEARING EXAMNER
MEETING AGENDA
d VIN a, VOY I Al Y:UU A.n
SPECML MEETING L OCA TION
Community Services Conference Room - Community Services Building
250 5th Avenue North
1. Call to Order
2. Public Hearings
a. FILE NO. CU-97-16, Application by Faith Community Church for a Conditional Use Permit for an
entryway addition onto the existing church which is currently a nonconfonning:use. The subject
property is located at 10220 238th Stnxt Southwest and is zoned RS-8.
b. FILE NO, V-9L-2_7, Application by Walt Pisco for multiple Variances to: 1) reduce die cumulative
required side setbacks (north and South property lines) fimn 35-feet to 12.5-fect, 2) reduce die
minimum side setback requirement (south property line) from 10-fed to S-fect, 3) reduce the
minimum side setback requirement (north property line) to 7.5 -feet; 4) reduce the minimum required
sued setback (cast property line) fiorn 25-fixt to 10-feeig arul, 3) increase the maximum permitted
height of 25-fed to 30-fed above, average grade level for the peak of a garage roof attached to a
residence. The requested variances have bm sought to allow additions to an existing residence
including a new attached garage. Tbe subject property is located at 15722 75th Place West and is
zoned RS-20.
C. FILE NO, V-97-57, Application by David & Inge John= for a Variance to reduce the required
sued setback (nordumst property line) from 25-fict to 10-fixt and to reduce the required rear setback
(southwest property line) from 25-fixt to 20-fect for the construction of a new one-story single-family
residence. Thc subject property is located at 17002 Talbot Road and is zoned RS-12.
d. FILE NO. Y--97-64; Application by Randy & Debbie Johnson for a Variance to allow a 12-foot high
he* to be located adjacent to the cast and south property line, in excess of the maximum permitted
height of 6-fcct. This application was submitted in response to a code enforcement action. The
subject property is located at 643 9th Avenue North and is zoned RS-12.
C. FILE NO. V-97-55; Application by Sheila & Kasey Knowlen for a Variance to reduce the required
street setback (from the cast property fine, 104th Avenue -West) from 25-fed to 20 fixt for the
construction of an approximate 936 square foot detached garage with an additional approximate 208
square foot attached carporL The subject property is located at 24025 104th Place West and is zoned
RS-8.
3. Administrative Reports - No Reports.
5M
�112-
A%
D
CITY- .0- F EDMONDS
250 SM AVENUE NORnL EDMONDS, WA 98020
PLANNING DIVISION ADVISORY REPORT
MDINGSq CONCLUSIONS9 AND RECOMIENDATIONS
TO: ROR MCCONNELL, HEARING EXAMINER
FROM: AL. a
Jeffey S. Wilson, AICP
Current Planning Supervisor
DATE: May 29,1997
FILE: V-97-55
HEARING DATEt TIME, AND PLACE: JUNE 5,1997 AT 9:00 AM
Community Services Conference Room
250 5th Avenue North
TABLE QF CONTENTS
Section
page
Application...................................................................................................................................
2
...........................................................................................................................
2
Site Description.
2
State
3
Edmonds Community Development Code ......................................................
3
TechnicalCornmittee .....................................................................................................................
5
Comprehensive, PJAn (ECDC) ........................................................................................................
5
Requ�st for Reconsideration ........................................................................................ I ..................
6
Appeals........................................................................................................................................
6
Iapseof Approval ................... ....................................................................................................
7
Noticeto the County Assessor .......................................................................................................
7
Appendices...............................................................................................
7
...................................
Part= Record
of ..........................................................................................................................
7
EXHIBIT "A",
FILE NO. V-97-5-5
7a n
.0
7M
z
UJ
_J
Ln
LU
LL.:
Z
0
0
LU
LL.
ti,
0
z
FJW..
B. RECOMMENDATION
Based on Statements of Fact, Conclusions, and Attachments in this report, we recommend
denial of the applicant's request.
Should the vanance request be approved, the applicant would need to modify the site plan so
that the proposed accessory structure cornplies with the minimum side setback requirements w
the RS-8 zone, or, submit a new Variance application to modify the side setback requirements.
Additionally, the subject property is also required to have a street setback of 25-fed fiont the
south property line, which is adjacent to 241st Suva SouthwesL The proposed drawings for
the accessory structure do not provide a dimension for this setback.
ol IUL MMI_NGS OF FACr AND CONCLUSIONS
A. SITE DESCRIPTION
1. Site Development and Zoning:
a. Facts:
(1) Size and Shape: The subject property is approcimatcly 9,375'squam fixt in
am and generally rectogular in sbapp.Ath approximaucly_75-fim -Of
fiontage on 104th Stred SW, fimtoge: on 104th Wes and.'
approximately 115-Ext in depth along'the north property fine and
.............. .. . .... . ................
Z
Cr
5�
d 5!
ca LU,
LU �E
CD U.
0
LU
U-
CD C!
Z 1--i�
�i f?ili
UA
01--
U-
W
0
Z
E
EW
A%OWW "UUUMS"111 un W&W awnust al.
2. Neighboring Development and Zoning:
a.
(1) NQTth- The area is developed with singlefamily residences and zoned RS-8
(sce Attachment 1).
(2) So th- The area is developed with single-fiunily residences and zoned RS-8
.y
(see Attachment 1).
(3) Egg. The area is developed with singlt-.fianily residences and zoned RS-8
(see Attachment 1).
(4) M�gg The area is developed with singlefianily residences and zoned RS-8
(sce tataclunent 0.
b. Conclusion Accessory structures are common with the development of shWo-
flunfly residences.
B. STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT (SEPA)
1. a. Fad: The application is exempt from SEPA pursuant to WAC 197-11-
800(l)(b)(j).
b. Conclusion Ile applicant and the City have satiAed the requirements of SEPA.
C. EDMONDS COMMUMTY DEVELOPMENT CODE (ECDC) COMIPLIANCE
1. a. Facts:
(1) Fdmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Chapter 20.15B.190A
states an applicant my request a variance from the standards of this
Chapter pursuant to the procedures set forth in ECDC Chapter 20.85
(Variances). Chapter 20.85 of the ECDC sets finth do mechanism whereby
a provision of the Code may be varied on a case -by -case basis if the
application of the provision would result in an unusual and unreasonable
hardship.
(2) ECDC Section 20.85.010 establishes the decisional criteria with which a
variance request must comply in order to be granted by the Hewing
Examiner TUsc criteria include: a spccial circumstance must wast
(special circumstances include: size, shape, topography, location or
surroundings of the property and public necessity for public structures); no
special privilege is grant4 the proposal is inconsistent with the
Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Code, the proposal will ra be
deftimmtal; and, the proposal is the minimum re cessaty to allow reasonable
use ofthe subject property.
V9745MM24"Y-W
0
z
(r 2
UO
(n a
(n LU
LU X
—J t-W
W LL
UA 0
LL
L'j
3:
z
Z
Us LL
2 =
73 C
U
0
Q
LU
LLI (J
0
z
E
�F]
(6) IU subject property is also required to have a street setback of B-fed from
the south property line, which is adjacent to 241st Street Southwest. IU
proposed drawings for the accessory structure do not provide a dimension
for this setback (see Attachment 4).
(7) The applicants declarations m response to the required 7eview criteria are
contained on Attachment 5.
(8) 11w applicant has not indicated what the.proposed height of the accessory
structure will be. Ilm maximuni permitted height fDr an accessory structure
in an RS-8 zone is 15-fect above average building grade.
b. Qn9lusions.
(1) Sg2gJal Cimumstancml- Special:circumstanccs.dD not appear to odd an the
subject property which would preclude the reasonable use of the subject
property as a singli-,fitmily residence. . The subject property appe=,. to
contain considerable developable area which the applicant could use without
the necassity of being granted a variance. The need for the variance appears
to be directly related to the size of the proposed acccWry structure and not
due to any specific constraints on the placement of the proposed accessory
structure related to some unique feature of the property itseK which limits
the options for the applicant to enjoy reasonable of the site.
However, some case could be made regarding special circumstances of the
jubject property related to the subject property having streets abutting what
-would be traditionally considered the fiont property line (104th Place West)
and the rear property line (104th Street SW). Typically, properties that tend
to have two street setbacks are comer lots. However, in this situation, the
stred abutting the subject site are opposite each other, which results in a
pinching down effect toward the center of the site.
(2) SMial Privilege - Approval of the requested variance would appear to
provide the applicant with a special privilege not enjoyed by the neighbors.
The applicant's have not provided any infimnation to show that other
properties in the vicinity of Ow jubject property have how granted similar
privileges.
0
PJkP 5 aff
We and Oc g=M!Voive P - The requested variance is not
(3) Zoning C
consistent with die Comprehensive Plan (see Section ELE beJovi) or the
Zoning C;ode.
z
(4) Not Detrimental - Approval of the requested variazice could result in
<
establishing a precedent in the neighborhood that vA= applied to another
Lu�
Cr. 2:
property could be specifically detrimental to adjacent property owners or the,
5 :)�
public as a whole.
-J :
U01
(5) Minimum Required - It appears that there is sufficient vacant area on the,
0:
(n j
W LU
subject property whereby the applicant could construct a narrower garage
ILI X,
-J J.-,
structure and place it in a manner that could.cornply with the required
(n u.
LU 0
setbacks.
Additionally, since the proposed structure appears to be of sufficient size to
accommodate thrm bays plus an attaclied caWt% the proposed garage
U.
would appear to be somewhat larger thari a typical earage for a smale-
0
LX"
family residence.
z I—
Furthermore, the depth of the garage could be reduce to 21-fiwt in depth and
;7- 0'
z t_:
still provide sufficient depth to park a car and comply with the nuin'imum
LU LU
street setback requirements.
U CDA
Therefore, the request as submitted does not appear to be the minimum
0
a
necessary to allow the applicant to maintain reasonable use of the subject
Ui
property.
(6) Should the variance request be approved, the applicant would need to
modify the site plan so that the proposed accessory structure complied with
LU
U
the minimum side setback requirements in the RS-8 zone, or, submit a now
85
Va=ce application to mmW the side setback requirements.
z
D. TECIINICAL COMMITTEE
a. EaqW.
(1) The Engineering Division has submitted comments related to the subject
application, these comments are, provided as Attaclineat 6.
(2) Even though specific comments were not provided by all Departments or
Divisions within the City, it is still the applicants responsibility to comply
with applicable City development regulations at the time of any budding
permit submitL-d.
0
b. Conclusion The applicant should comply with all requirements placed on the
proposed development by other Departments/Divisions of the City.*
L COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (ECDC)
1. a. Egg. The subject property is designated as "Single Family Small Lot."
b. Conclusion The proposed use. of the subject property is consisted with the
typical uses envisioned with siagle-fitinfly developmen4 therefore, it is consistent
with the existing Comprehensivo Plan Land use desigmdon for the subject site.
0
'.T
A -T,
V
W
� �WWE
z
-J
-J I
(n 1
UJ �
T)
z
z
L)
0
0
LU
LL.
W
Y
8
z
�tl
140
threatened by view, trafflc, or land Use L encroachments.
(3) Page 31, subsection B.6 state, "Require that new residential development
be compatible with the natural constraints of slopes, soils, geology,
vegetation and drahnage.
b. Conclusion The proposed development is inconsistent with the above adopted
goals and policies of the City for the development of residential property in the
City. The City should be particularly sensitive to this issue in light of die flict that
the applicant's request pertains to an accessory structure and is not related to a
request to seek relieffrom the required setbacks to due to natural constraints of the
property which would adversely affect the development of the site with the
primary use of a singlefinfily residence.
III. RECONSIDERATION'S AND APPEALS
The following is a summary of the dcadfincs and procedures for filing reconsideration's and appeals.
Any person wishing to file or respond to,a recommendation or appeal shouldrcontact,the Planning
Department for further procedural information.
A. REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION
Section 20.100.010.G allows for the Hearing Examiner tq reconsider his decision or
recommendation if a written request is filed within ten (10) working days of the date of the
initial decision by any person who attends the public hearing and signs the attendance register
and/or presents testimony, or by any person holding an ownership interest in a tract of law
which is the subject of such decision or recommendation. Ile reconsideration request must
cite specific references to the findings and/or the criteria contained in the ordinances gmzning
the type of application being reviewed.
B. "PEALS
Section 20.105.020.A & B describe how appeals of a Hearing Examiner decision or
recommendation shall be made. The appeal shall be made in writing, and shall include the
decision being appealed along with the name of theproject and the date of the decision, the
name of the individual or group appealing the decision, their interest in the matter, reasons why
WV the aPV6Mk believes the decision to be wrong, and all required appeal few. The appeal must
be filed with the Community Development Director within ten (10) working days after the date
of the decision being appealed.
------- 7i
'/77%;
7
M "LAPSE OFARRML,
ieciioli 20105.020A B, describe,'bow,.,.appals.,4 a,-,,. Haring,. So . mi tier decision ',or
be made. IM6 ap�Cal i6� I�i in
unenmon shaU w'd,it"in, ina-,",intlude,i6
z
being,;:, Jdongwwlt6 name of p the
do roject,and: dati lon-Vw Mam6 albe,
illdividW'or grou� a0pealing tho.docision, duirinterest'in matter, rasons why apollant,
'91i and
mes t�ie ded-gion.to be wrong. llw.v Devekpmed
u
Director ten,(10) -�orking days aftr the date ofthe decision bei44*alA.
L) 01
Lu!
XOTICE I:Q THE COUNW- ASSESSOR
J
(A U.
—0
uJ
Ue PVVVdy OWM nay as a MMIt of &C, decision Makred by Examiner
Haring I" a
dump kthe valuation -Of ft property Wthe Sndhoniishrouw;6�s off
U. M
VL' AEPENDIMS
e 5
X LLj
Attacluneab I tluwgh 6 am allached.
z I--
L Vicinity I Zoning Nup
ul tul
2. Application.
Stred and Lot Plan
0
01—
.3.
4, Siteplan
5. Declarations of the Applicant
LU
6. Engineering Division Project Review Comment Memoran
'dum, dated 4110M, ,
WL PART= QF_ RECORD
fu
I—
0
4pliclat
z
Edmonds Planning Division
Edmonds Public Works Divwon
Edmonds Egowring Division
Edmonds Parks & Recreafion Division
Edmonds Fire Dqwtmcft
0
Q
F
-!Mb
NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN
E TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT.
El
CD
CP
F]
h -4""
o
LEI
Cr.
g:D
L)
0
rn LU
U3
_J
Ln U0-
LU
2 �
:3
LL
C4
0
Lai
z I.-
C
0
0
UJ
LL C
..'a
UJ (J
U
0
z
L-11
. ........
Lit onds
city of e(�
Lland use application
(3 ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD
13 COMP PLAN AMENDMENT
0 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
(3 HOME OCCUPATION
13 FORMAL SUBDIVISION
0 SHORT SUBDIVISION
13 LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT
E3 PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
13 OFFICIAL STREET MAP AMENDMENT
STREET VACATION
13 REZONE
0 SHORELINE PERMIT
XY�RIANCE / REASONABLE USE
EXCEPTION
13 OTHER
cA - owre, - (-7-1
FILE# V-"'V I-
Lc� -Q1
DATE 211-7 REC'D BY
FEE-4132--f" -RECEIPT# -2-2-70!3'
HEARING DATE
HE 0 STAFF 0 PB El ADB 0 CC
TAKEN:
13 APPROVED El DENIED 13 APPEALED
APPEAL#
Applicant <�4e.�L_1,4 ji�IL_SeLl erueujt_�W Phone z0f 413cq
_'� -1 s
Address cP901K /Ot" aACIZ CEOM00)9-)�_(14 9'P.20
Property Address or Location -A 140,9, 0 qs/('2'2�
Property Owner5Ag�,,_,A 16 k-,qg't5�4 /W4pLj1L4-:A) Phone !�ap Q Sill -1:32T
Address 42 4 D 2-5- / o4 M 6-->Y& P W A-&-r kr- f AJA a 0�q vn
Agent —,)4AJr- -J&(nnA9013 Phone _11 - &JO-5-
Address Xqq_)�2 /C)6771
Tax Acc; # 001 —Sec. Twp. Rng.
Legal Description L-o r I
7 0 L, Q,--
Details of Projector Proposed Use cj=_T-1-
R14ak' � /
—Arl e
The undersigned applicant, and his/ her/ its heirs, and assigns, in consideration of the processing of the
application agrees to release, indemnify, defend and hold the City of Edmonds harmless from any and all
damages, including reasonable attorney's fees, arising from any action or infraction based in whole or in part upon
false, misleading, inaccurate or incomplete information furnished by the applicant, his/ her/ its agents or
employees.
The undersigned applicant grants his/ her/ its permission for public officials and the staff of the City of Edmonds to
enter the subject property for the purpose of inspection and posting attendant to this applicalion.
SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT/ OWNER/ AGENT --
ATTACHMENT 2
0 File No. V-97-55
M
lu
179, U3
Lot
of
S�wdLotPlm
ofwbj�Propaty
m
Br�
241.111
----------
-. v.r
41
e
M4.
- - - - - -
- - -
IL --
wp�.rft G�Mlft
1010—
z
cc
;5:
d
WI
05!
!J i
LU
Z
t
'i
LU
0
0
LU
U.
1B
U
i=
0
z
I M
E
Nt
Vafiance
Applicant Declarations.
T.fu*s lot isbordered on fluee sides by public streets. This will
three Sides for any SftUCt=. require a setback of 25' on
We are asking for a variance of 5' on one side so that a
detached two car garage may be located a reasonable distance for the existing residence.
This variance will allow a distance of 7' between the existing residence and the detached
W1
garage and 'R allOW better access to the back yard of the existing residence. Please
refer to attachment A and B for ftuther information.
2. This is not a special privilege for this property. This will allow the property owner to
construct a detached two car garage of reasonable depth and still have reasonable access
to the back Yard of his residence.
3. This area is zoned single family residence and this project is consistent with the
comprehensive plan.
4. The zoning Ordinance is this area allows for detached structures of this type.
5. The construction of this detached garage win not effect any views or cause a loss of
Property values to surrounding property. Ihe construction will not be injurious'or harrrLful
to any person or to any surrounding properties.
6. 'Me requested variance of 5' is the minimum requested in order to allow the construction
Ofthe detached garage a reasonable distance for the existing residence and still allow the
garage to have a reasonable depth. In order to have this distance for the existing residence
there is no Other alternative. Please refer to attachment A and B for finther information.
T
, NN"
R
1, V "j!
R, W�2 .
qv� �N�1;
41
rX , !; F� 4-1�
LIS
1-"-MO1RAA"1(JM
-19
z 5�
Uzi
Date: A ril 11, 1997
P
To:
W U.; Planning Division
2 From:
Pordy Hyde, Engineering, Coordinator
SubJect Vari6nce f r-Kn
U1 -Q len at 24025
(V-97-056)
z il-1
OR
us tu The application has been reviewed by the Engineering Division. Storm
5 0 drainage improvements will be required with the building permit if over 2000 sq.
ft. of new impervious surface is created It should be,noted that the applicant
refers to this structure as a "two -car garage but describes a facility that is 44' by
LU
26', which is more in scale witha' four or five vehicle building. It should also be
noted that the'applicant's existing chain link fence apparently encroaches inte
the public right-of-way. The fence should be relocated or a street use permit
should be applied for.The applicant will need to comply with all the terms of any
future permits. The application is considered complete at this time.
z
0
CM OF EDMOPM
V970SS.DM
ENGECEM; DnWON
ATTACHMENT 6
File No. V-97-55
I T
D
T
I
z
Notice of Development Application & Public Hearing
Dateoll'Notice: May22,1997
File # V-97-55
Name ofAipplicart, .....................
Sheila & Kasey KnoMen
Requested Permits
Date ofAipplicallon: .....................
AP617,1997
and Approvals: .............
Date Application Completc........
Apdl 30,1997
Other Required
Permits not yet applied
Project Location:
24025 104th Pl. W., Edormunds
for (if known): ...............
Pmlact Descripflon:
Variants to reduce the required street selbse
least 104th Ave. W.) hour 25-feet to 20-feet I�or
Required Studies
..construlitorrofanapprox, 936squamfoot
related
detached garage arith an additional approx.
to the project: ...............
208 aqua. footaffachedcaricurt The subject
property is zoned RS-8.
Related Environmental
Variance
Unknown
Unknown
Critical Areas Checklist
Public Comments due by . ...........
June 5,1997 Documents: .................
Chy Contact for project ..............
JeMilsom
0
4xi
9�
Date: June 5, 1997
Time: 9:00 A.M, Place: Community Svos. Conf. Room - 250 Sth Ave. N., Edmonds
u .
Information on this development application can be viamd or obtained at the City ofEdmonds Community Semices Department,
250 Sth Avenue
North, Edmonds, WA 98020. (206) 771-0220. Public comments should also be sent to Us address.
on .41 be we wihin' i�g 4. i&rn iui� i�i , fk,
P" f
one. �141 �Ios� 1""s 0", "a'
"':4
-4.
The removal, mutilation, deretruction, or concealment ofthis This notice may be removed
Warning!
notice before the hearing date Is a misdemeanor truntsbable by after. June 5,1997
fine and Imprismuormt.
0
z
Cr.
;5:
44
91
Le 14
LU
2 i
C2:
U.:
z I
LU
LAJ
z
TYPE ON THIS SIDE WITHIN BOXES
5649-005-605-00
5650-000-006-00
Floyd Rasmussen
John C & Maxin Weddle
24211 104th PL W
24029 104th Ave W
Edmonds, WA 98020
Edmonds, WA 98020
5649-005-006-00
5650-000-007-00
Lame Walker
Mark A & Li Palmatier
24217 104th PL W
24101 104th Ave W
Edmonds, WA 98020
Edmonds, WA 98020
5649-005-007-00
5650-000-008-00
Vera L Larson
Michael Roma
24225 104th PL W
24111 104th Ave W
Edmonds, WA 98020
Edmonds, WA 98020
5649-001-008-00
5650-000-009-02
Leonarcf'R'Carr
Randall &Anne Barnes
24233 104th PL W
10310 240th PL SW
Edmonds, WA 98020
Edmonds, WA 98020
5650-000-001-00
5650-000-009-03
Ben Whitmarsh.
Carl 0 Denton
10325 240th PL SW
10312 240th PL SW
Edmonds, WA 98020
Edmonds, WA 98020
5650-000-002-00
5650-000-009-04
Edwin L Ganwich
John Jordan
10317 240th PL SW
10308 240th PL �W
Edmonds, WA 98020
Edmonds, WA 98020
5650-000-003-00
Kathleen M & R Waters
Sheila & Kasey Knowlen
10307 240th PL SW
24025 104th Pl . W.
Edmonds, WA 98020
Edmonds, WA 98020
5650-000-004-00
Paul L Smithers
Jane E. Jacobson
10316 240th PL SW
24212 106th Pl. W.
Edmonds, WA 98020
Edmonds, WA 98020
5650-000-005-00
William J & Jea -Astel
10324 240th PL SW -
Edmonds, WA 98020
Residing at
e�eilles
APO.doc\L.\Temp\forms
Subscribed and sworn to before me this
Notary Public in and for the
Residing
Do=ent2
of Washington.
T
�i
LU
LU
i nat on ine zzna Oay ot may, 199-1 tnelattacned Notice Of Hearing was malled as
required to adjacent property owners, the names of which were provided by the
applicant.
Signed cl"'AA�A,
Subscribed and sworn to before me this clay of J J�
DacwenO
z
LL
LU
_j
(a LL
C
LL.
U
3
z I.
;: C
Z I-
LUI u
0-
0 �
LU L
LL
1 U61 I
U 1
51
z
STATE Or WASHtXGTON,
COUNTY OF SNOHOMSH,
PUBLIC HEARING A 0
NOTICE OF DEVELOPME
APPLICATION I
NAME OF APPLICANT:
the
our.
2 '**
5-
10,
Th.
RS-
TIME- 9�00 AM
DATE: June 5, Igo?
LOCATION:
8ommunity Services
ant. Room
250 6th Ave N Edmonds
SANDY CAA9E 1 27,0114
P.1:110"- M.y 21. 99 .
B-2-1
The undersigned, being first duly sworn on oath deposes and says
that she is Principal Clerk of THE HERALD, a daily newspaper
v";
printed and published In the City of -Everett, County of Snohomish,
and State of Washington; that said newspaper is a newspaper 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 ........................................
Public Hearing and Development Application
........................... ............ .............................................................. ...............
Faith Community Church
................................... .................... .................................... ......................
File No. CU-97-16
................................................. ................................................................................
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:
May 21, 1997
.......................... _ ......................................... .................. .....................................
.... ..... ......... ............................. ................................. .........................................
t at sa-id newspaper was ;71a y at buted to its subscribers
I f
du g all of said period.
.. ..... .... .. ...... ............ .....
. .. .... .. ..................... .........................
Principal Clerk
Subscribed and sworn to before me this ........ .........
da f., ............ ..... Ma . ..... ............................. ig.9.7
'Y'
................ .... . ..... ... .... ... .. .. ........ ........ ......... . .....................
Notary Public n and for e S te of Washington.
(7residing at Everett, SSqnoh County,
RECEIVED
JUN 2 W7
EDMONDS CITY CLERK
10�
AN ftmx
01
WARSAR^
f-AMMY
ago 4T" ^%FXNWU MORT" womomos. W^ *&as* 48041 �7 1 -0KA0 -. VAX tace) Two-onal
t.,
COMMUNITY *N^VICXO DKI-AIRYMUNT
Pbub" Works twinnninO a PATkA and Recreation a flnginewfne
01
0AIrs -17RANISMIT-i-140-
NUMBER -=F
(Including C�cvwr Pago)
Aeciplents -rel000 for Number:
FACSIMIL-S SQUIPMEN-l":
AUtommtic/Orcup It
(2.3 mins.); C3rcup tit
It there are any problems
U during tranumtselon or
documents are received
inco late.2pleaso cult
").71 -0 Z20 and as;k
f4o2roe)
Sander -a -relecoplar Number. (208) 771-0-221
1RE", 1-.f
!h2 fix— e
42%
q -7
0.
h1co'-wonotod Awgust 12, 1690
S. Cities Internatlonal — HakInan. Japan
TRANSMISSION REPORT
THIS DOCUMENT (REDUCED SAMPLE ABOVE)
WAS SENT
** COUNT
# 3
*** SEND ***
NOI
REMOTE STATION I.D.
START TIME
DURATION
#PAGES
COMMENT
ll
12083393049
1 5-15-97 12:15PM
1139" 1
3
1
03
......
....
CITY OF. EDMONDS,
BARBARA FAHEY
MAYOR
260 5TH AVENUE NORTH EDMONDS. WA 98020 (2016) 771-0220 FAX (206) 771-0221
COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT
t 9 Public Works o Planning Parks and. Recreation Engineering .
Is
TELECOPIER COVER PAGE.
TO: �Pa7ottz
16
DATE TRANSMITTED*—'
NUMBER.OF PAG ES,
(Including Cover Page)
Recipients Telecopier Number:
FACSIMILE EQUIPMENT:
Automatic/Group 11
(2,3 mins.); Group III
FROM!
If thdre are any problems
during transmission or
documents are received
incomplete, please call
(206) 771-0220 and ask
for
Sender's Telecopier Number: (206) 771-0221
PUBLIC HEARING AND
NOTICE OF DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION
Name of Applicant: Faith Community Church
File No.: CU-97-16
Project Location: 10220 238th St. SW, Edmonds
Project Description: Conditional Use Permit for an entryway addition onto the existing church which is
currently a nonconforming use. The subject property is zoned RS-8.
City Contact: John Bissell
Public Comment Period Due By: 6/5/97
Name of Applicant:
Wait Pisco
File No.:
V-97-27
Project Location:
15722 75th Pl. W.
Project Description:
Multiple Variances to: reduce the cumulative side setbacks (north & south) from 35.
feet to 12.5-feet, reduce the side setback (south) from 10-feet to 5-feet; reduce the
side setback (north) to 7.5-feet; reduce the street (east) from 25-feet to 10-feet; and
increase the height of 25-feet to 30-feet above average grade level for the peak of a
garage roof attached to residence. The subject property is zones RS-20
City Contact:
Meg Gruwell
Public Comment Period Due By:
6/5197
Name of Applicant:
David & Inge Johnson
File No.:
V-97-57
Project Location:
17002 Talbot Rd., Edmonds
Project Description:
Variance to reduce the required street setback (northeast) from 25-feet to 10-feet
and to reduce the required rear setback (southwest) from 25-feet to 20-feet for the
construction of a new one-story singe -family residence. The subject property is
zoned RS-12.
City Coptact:
Meg Gruwell
Public Comment Period Due By:
6/5/97
Name of Applicant:
Randy & Debbie Johnson
File No.:
V-97-64
Project Location:
643 9th Ave. N., Edmonds
Project Description:
Variance to allow a 12-foot high hedge to be located adjacent to the east and south
property line, in excess of the maximum permitted height of 6-feet This application
was submitted In response to a code enforcement action.. The subject property is
zoned RS-6.
City Contact:
Meg Gruwell
Public Comment Period Due By:
6/5/97
Name of Applicant: Sheila & Kasey Knowlen
File No.: V-97-55
Project Location: 24025 104th Pl. W., Edmonds
Project Description: Variance to reduce the required street setback (east, 104th Ave, W.) from 25-feet to
20-feet for the construction of an approx.-936 square foot detached garage with an
additional approx. 208 square foot attached carport The subject property is zoned
RS-8.
117�
"I
PC
�Zst. 189'
April 30, 1997
CITY OF EDMONDS BARBARA FAHEY
250 STH AVENUE NORTH - EDMONDS, WA 98020 - (206) 771-0220 - FAX (206) 771-0221 MAYOR
COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Public Works e Planning * Parks and Recreation 9 Engineering
Mr. & Mrs. Knowlen
24025 104th Place West
FAhWW WA 98020
Subject: , ASSIGNMENT OF IWARING DATE
Dear Mr. & Mrs. Knowlen:
Your application is now complete mW has been scheduled for public hearing at the tim and place listed
below.
Action: for gqLb�
File No. Assigned: v-97-ss
Date of Hicaring- Jud", 1 7
Tim: 9:00 A.M. or as soon ithereafter as possible.
Place: Cornmunity Services Confem= Room
250 5th Avenue North
HQuing Body: - Ream Examiner
Please be aware that your presence at the hearing is highly advisable. If an applicant or his representative
is not present, the item may be tnoved to the end of the agenda. Iterns not reached by the end of the hearing
will be continued to the following month!s agenda.
If you have any further questions, plmw do not hesitate to contact nw at 771-0220.
Sincerely,
Conumunity Services Deparfinat - Planning Division
I Wilson, AICP
Current Planning Supervisor
PC:
-JamE.Jacobson, 24212106thPlaccWes� EdnxxidsWA 9go2o
97-SWIDW 9 Incorporated August 11, 1890 9
41403"7401tammoulom
Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan
I.= 0