601 MAIN ST.PDF11111111111111
11967
601 MAIN ST
CITY OF EDMONDS
FOR INSPECTION CALL Permit
PUBLIC WORKS DEPAR*T (0
775-2525 Ext. 220 Issue Date
SIDE SEWER PERMIT
PERMIT MUST BE POSTED ON JOB SITE * I
3W, WAWWAWAIVAW
"AA I k�j
1. Address Of struc on
2. Property Legal Description (include all easements)' ��)j
�,O_c
3. Single Family Residence Multi -Family No. of Units
Commercial
4. Owner and/or Builder
5. Contractor & License No.
6. Invasion into City Right -of -Way: No Yes (If Yes Right-of-
way Construction Permit Required - Call Dial Dig (342-5344) before
excavation).
E-4 7. Cross other private property: Yes No Easement required -
U attach legal description and county easement number.
H
9 READ THE FOLLOWING AND SIGN:
P4
P4
14 a. Property owners must obtain a permit to install side sewers on
>4 their property. A licensed side sewer contractor must be employed to
construct side sewers in the public right-of-way.
b. The side sewer contractor assumes full reponsibility for each
E-4 installation for one year.
W
9 c. Commercial establishment requires a minimum of a six inch (6")
P4
side'sewer line.
0 d. Side sewers may not be installed closer than thirty inches (30")
U to any structure.
W
M e. Side sewer lines must be lald at a minimum grade of 2% (1.150)
0 and maximum grade of 100% (450). 0
P f. No turn in side s8wer greater than 45 (1/8,bend) is 0 allowed
between cleanout. All 90 turns must be constructed of a 45 (1/8
bend) and wye with removable cap.
g. No down spouts, footing drains or floor drains can be connected
to side sewer system.
h. Pea gravel is required for bedding when installing sewer lines
through other than granular soil.
i. Cleanouts are required at 30"-60" from each plumbing exit line
and at minimum intervals of 1001 along sewer,line run.
j. Trenches within City right-of-way must be restored to original
conditions. Contractors shall be responsible for right-of-way failure
due to poor compaction of fill.
k.. Side sewer must be left uncovered until inspected and approved
by the City.
1. Inspection during normal working hours only. Two (2) working
days notice required.
DATE:
I certify that I have read
and shall comply with the above
PERMIT FEE:
H DISAPPROVED BY,: Date:
ow I By: Date:
P4 CONNECTION FEE:
APPROVED By: Date:
PERMIT MUST BE POSTED ON JOB SITE
The City of Umonds Side Sewer Drawing EASEMENT No - ------------- ------ --------- ------------- :
NEW CONSTRUCTION E] REPAIRS 11 LID NO - - ---- -_ ------ - ASMT- No.
OWNER ------ --------------------------------------------------- CONTRACTOR ------------ - ------------------------------------------ PERMIT NO.
joB ADDRESS ... 4a0.%--nAAWl-A ... = - ----- ....................... LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT NO. - --------- 4C) ------- -------- BLOCK NO . ........ !j!)7 ------
................................................................................................. ------ ----------------------------------------------------
NAME OF ADDITION ... Cl-r.-Ir ...... (CK—.A!EQL,:*4lcA, 'r
...................................
P.
SUWOAT
P
fW
t-� w*,4v^
PWW-0001-11/75 (REV.11/78)
Approved:
DATE ---- By ........
1-1*1
TO PLANNING
ENGINEERI.NG
'FI RE
INTER -OFFICE COMMUNICATIONS
DATE 3/13
FRIOM., BUILDI.NG
SUBJECT: Aria Carpets @ 601 Main Street -Permit #800212
O.K. for final approval?
Suspense date: 3/20/81
-DgAl
U�n L 7
DO-
f7�
**41Y
"77
1981
RECEWED-
MAR 1 G 1981
Punkc Works
t
that would satisfy the people in the area who do not want it ever opened.
MOTION: MEMBER ALLEN MOVED, SECONDED FOR DISCUSSION BY COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST, TO ACCEP E P,44�
TRADE THAT IS OFFERED AND TO VACATE 8TH AVE. WITHOUT THE COMPENSATION FOR PARCEL E
After brief discussion, and a statement that the Council wanted to assure that thii
matter is not treated any differently from that involving someone other than a
Councilmember, THE MOTION CARRIED. WITH COUNCILMEMBER JAECH VOTING NO.
COUNCIL
Councilmember Naughten said the Public Works/Community Development Committee had met
with the ADB two weeks ago, and he provided the Council with minutes of that meeting.
He said the ADB has some frustrations, both internal and external, and would like to
NOTION: have itself reviewed. COUNCILMEMBERMAUGHTEN THEREFORE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL -
MEMBER ALLEN, TO HAVE A PUBLIC'HEARING,ON JUNE 15, 1981 TO REVIEW THE ADB. MOTION
CARRIED.
Councilmember Naughten suggested that the Council again have a float in the 4th of
July parade and that the Council members contribute to the purchase of candy kisses
to be thrown from the float.
PIP, jg&J.,,Councilmember Kasper advised that he would not be present for the June 30 meeting and
fy the 4th of July parade.
1-�<Councilmember Nordquist noted that a letter had been received from Carolynne Harris
olf Aria Carpets and William Keegan of William's, both businesses located at the
intersection of 6th and Main, asking for help in increasing the safety at this inter-
section. Visibility is bad when entering the intersection and people do not stop for
foot traffic. The Staff was asked for a recommendation to improve this intersection.
voa4A�).
Councilmember Nordquist stated he had received a confidential letter from the City
Attorney and then read the same material in the newspaper and he asked that if material
is confidential it be afforded the proper protection and not be leaked to the news-
papers.
Councilmember Goetz advised that the Professional Services Selection Committee had
met three times and had made some recommended revisions to the procedures and selection
criteria for consultant selection. They proposed that Resolution 493 be revised so
that the formal evaluation process would apply only to capital projects involving an
estimated total cost of more than $30,000 and only to noncapital projects involving
an estimated total cost of more than $15,000. The current resolution specifies a
capital cost threshold of $10,000 and does not consider noncapital projects. The
$10,000 threshold was Judged to be too low to warrant the formal process which was
outlined. The Council was furnished copies of the committee's recommended changes
MOTION: for their consideration. COUNCILMEMBER GOETZ MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER ALLEN,
d.:5 amV TO PLACE ON THE JUNE 2, 1981 CONSENT AGENDA THE PROPOSED REVISIONS TO THE PROCEDURES
air# ddszc AND SELECTION CRITERIA FOR CONSULTANT SELECTION. MOTION CARRIED.
City Engineer Jim Adams noted that the Shell Creek basin study could not be completed
this season, and he suggested some interim measures be investigated. He hoped to be
,,,-',,able to identify some interim arrangements to remedy some of the things that have
been damaging to property owners downstream., hoping to do something now to prevent
damage from storms that may occur while the overall drainage basin study is taking
place. An agreement had been negotiated with Reid -Middleton to determine the feasi-
bility and estimated costs of possible interim solutions. Councilmember Allen thought
there were things that could be taken care of by the City people without going to a
consultant for a feasibility study. Mr. Adams said they do not have the capacity in-
house to make a feasibility study, and an interim feasibility study could determine
where the facilities can be placed. Mayor Harrison said he anticipted some design --
not a feasibility study. Mr. Adams said some soil investigations must be done to
determine the capacity upstream, and they have to determine where the water is coming
from and when it concentrates. Councilmember Allen responded that they should have
had a proposal six months ago that would have had this built by now, but the Mayor
would not award the contract, and she saw this as a way for the Mayor to get around
awarding to the contractor recommended for this and instead awarding to Reid -Middleton.
Mr. Adams said the committee had discussed having two contracts --one for the feasibility
and one for the design. He said they probably should readvertise for Just a straight
feasibility study and then advertise again for a design consultant after the feasibility
study is completed. He said the formal selection procedure will take a minimum of
5-6 weeks, and then 50-60 days to completion. Then they would have to determine what
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Page 4 - May 26, 1981
FILE COPY 10
MEMO TO: Planning Department
FROM: Engineering Division
D . ecember 31, 1 ftl?4646t ) '14 k- - -
SUBJECT: COM11ENTS TO JANUARY A.D.B. (Architect . ural' 1Ye'__sfg__h Board)-
ITEMS
The Engineering Division of Public Works has the following comments
to make regarding hearings set -for the January, 1981 A.D.B. Meeting:
CONSENT AGENDA.'
ADB-58-80 VILLAGE PROPERTIES - Review of chimneys for nine -unit
apartment building at 7520 203th St. S.W. (PHI)
No information received.
ADB-100-80 ARIA CARPETS - Review of sign for carpet shop at 601
Main St. Wc)
No information received.
ADB-23-80 GO-N-JOY FOODS - Review of screening of rooftop mechan-
ical equipment at 7207 212th St. S.W. (CC,)
No information received.
ADB-89-80 DICK CASSUTT - Final review of an addition for beauty
salon at 53-9 Main St. (BC)
Wel,are opposed to reducing the driveway width to less than
12 . One way onlyttraffic from Main Street. Parking lay-
out must be redesigned. Submit a plan with all dimensions
shown. Plans as submitted are not compatable. For all*
overhangs over driveway, show verticle clearance.
Z
1�
U
0
U
0
0
0
CITY OF EDMONDS MW
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
RIGHT - OF - WAY CONSTRUCTION PERMIT
A. *Address or vicinity of Construction
0 Owner: PVT 0-S, W-r
N ame
IA12 ..
Mailing Address
City, State, Zip Code
e Contractor:
Name
> —)A 2
Mailing Address
City, State, Zip Code
No. ' � . '41, -
Issue Date
9 Permit Issued To-'P
Type of Work to be Done:
Work in Connection With:
El Sub or Plat 0 Single Family
�a Corriml. / A t Condo.
Pavement Cut: Z J1' No
8 ri?trw � I Pfta
State License Number
7 ?7- f) -7L
Telephone Number
* * NO WORK TO BEGIN PRIOR TO PERMIT ISSUANCE * *
B. APPLICANT TO READ AND SIGN
INDEMITY: Applicant understands and by his signature to this application, agrees to hold the City of Edmonds harmless
from any injuries, damages, or claims of any kind or description whatsoever, foreseen or unforeseen, that may be made
against the City of Edmonds, or any of it's departments or employees, including or not limited to the defense of any legal
proceedings including defense, costs, court costs, and attorney fees by reason of granting this permit.
Upon issuance of this permit, the contractor is responsible for workmanship and materials for a period of one year
following the final inspection and acceptance of the restoration by the Engineering Division.
Funds held from the Security Deposit (estimated restoration fee) will be held until the final street patch is completed, at
which time a debit or credit will be processed for issuance to the applicant.
Work is to be inspected. Restoration to be in accordance with City Code. Traffic Control to be in accordance with Traffic
Section of City Code. Street to be kept clean at all times. A 24 - hour notice is required for inspection by Engineering. Call
775-2525, extension 220.
I understand that this permit -must be available at the j,ob,site for inspection purposes at all times.
Signature: Date
Owner or Agent
THIS PERMIT MUST BE POSTED AT THE JOB SIT FOR INSPECTION PURPOSES
CALL DIAL - DIG PRIOR TO BEGINNING WORK
C. Issued B
y.
T ime Authorized: Vold after -i- days
Special Conditions:
Permit Fee:
Security Deposit:
Receipt No.:
Fund I I I Fee:
Ammendments: Street Cut Dimensions
X
* * NO WORK TO BEGIN PRIOR TO PERMIT ISSUANCE * *
Eng. Div. December 1978
FIELD INSPECTION 0 ES' (Fund. 111 - Alte cony to Street Dent
Comments:
Diagram:
Contractor called for inspection Yes No
Work DisaT)proved Bv: Date: Bv: Date:
Work Apuroved, Bv: Date:
Inspector:
Enq. Div. December -1078
DISPATCHER POSTED
t�AP PAGE
wo. NO 0 83 8
Nk
4.10.00
CROSS -INEX AND REVIEW AgSlaNMENrs
INITIATIN4 ACTION--dPA-13r-4DATF-6F,�," PAGE oF
OWNER NAME: �w S'
— A4
ADDRESS*- 4W 2&P7 S�
r
APPLICANT NAME.:
ADDRESS.,
SITE LOCATICN OR ADDRESS: 401 Ma4�
ZONE.,
LrLdAL DESCRIPTION:
ATTACHED
FILE Rd. :ENC RF-SULTS FILED IN
, a R. %ft -I
OIL zy FOR
1) 1 V. Uj 3t c'b c, N E X T t4
TYPE 0 F lu MEET1146 'o ' 2 :p W. U) t4
z 'm I t Z, '" MEETING 0 1� lu Ift
REC tu cc A A 4c Q-' to cc CA
ACTION Z PATE PATE ul
DA TE
SET
ac v
-&aLgs-
xx
x
x
x
5-4
A
_Uq/
X�
00,
---
S:�e,
I
H
ENGINFEEPUNG
REVIEWS
3'
Asslamso
PATE ro
NOTES
-- —
DATE Toy
;.
-Assl NED
DATE TO
NOT S
DATE By
PREVIOU3 HISTORY
sirg R-EV113W VISIT
UTILITIES
VRAINA4JL/rop0e.ltAPHY
srREEr3 /SIDRWALKS
TRAFFIC/PARKiNd
ZONING COOS
FIRE MAP.SHAL___._
dly-ea-1 ,W
_Ve!!!n-4 AU-F-Y
41/0 ---- Adk ---
low
LOr Vka
cop
EKP,.CVM T
oovvm -I o
e=v i cpv=
If
P, "Ito
(001
U.0 'A
n.,
�17
-((A T
50,
9- L I
77
A--
G-n-
LPrs I o
Memo to: PlanningWepartment
From: Engineering Division
Subject: Board of Adjustment Comments
Page -2-
BERT STOLE (cont'd.)
11
for Meeting of 1, 1980
permitted business is limited to that which would not re-
quire more than one parking space per 590 square feet
of building size. This figure* is based on applicant's
submittal.
Drainage will be further reviewed by Engineering with
Building Permit application. I
CU-32-80 RICHARD EIDEN - 7415 180th St. S.W.
Conditional Use Permit for filling and grading over 500
cubic yards at 7415 180th Street S.W.
From applicant's submitted drawings, there appears to be
approximately 1,000 cubic yards in place at the present
time. Application should be modified to reflect a larger
amount of fill.
Existing rockery up to 10 feet high to be verified for
stability by a licensed Civil Engineer. Drainage plan is
required in accordance with Chapter 70 of Uniform Building
Code, and to be submitted for review by City Engineer.
Existing sanitary sewer cleanout in 15 foot easement to
be raised with a concrete ring and the cap reset as re-
quired by City Engineer.
One foot of earth cover is required over existing 16"
concrete culvert at South end before any flexible (as-
phalt) driveway is placed over it.
With the completion of the above, Engineering would not
object to this Conditional Use Permit.
V-14-80 LAURENCE AND CAROLYNNE HARRIS - 601 Main St.
Variance to renovate an existing nonconforming structure,
which is nonconforming as to setbacks, to an amount ex-
ceeding the permitted 25% of the actual valuation of the
building, and also to allow a deck in the sideyard set-
back at 601 Main St.
Existing,apparently unstable, low concrete walls on City
property on 6th Avenue and Main Street should be relocated
Memo to: Planning Department
From: Engineering Division
Subject: Board of Adiustment Comments for Meeting of May 21, 1980
Page -3-
LAURENCE AND CAROLYNNE HARRIS (cont'd.)
to within applicant's property lines.
With this requirement added, Engineering would not object
to this variance.
.111111111 111, Ing
111 01211131211211
JEA/j f
cc: Pat Wilson
CITY OF EDMONDS
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE
APPLICANT. ADDRESS
CITY & ZIP(�f�714)'-11�1-?L,-/) PHONE
INDICATE TYPE OR DEGREE OF INTEREST IN PROPERTY
F*,- # � - t J� - (b 0
DATE Cb C7
FEE
RECT #
Cj
APO'S
HEARING DATE: -`7 --J
LOCATION OR ADDRESS OF PROPERTY
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY [__C7r (I Cr,7/ F-
\ /^, --7 T—� r—�
VARIANCE REQUESTED:
-1-0 6ETWIKS j nAM AMr1LKg�_F,,,KC - - -T-r- -Fa�cm-ro 4-5yo CF-T��
Anl-ckv;�wk-lloKj -ir -
5 j C4 E /A C- F-:T - F--2?4\ s�NLLfAk/ ADFCv )5u-(Cp�s� W
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
USE ZONE:
ZONING ORDINANCE REQUIREMENT: a, rLv.�
-A,,C tn A A� J ,I
. �uj A�
r - C�- Ut
STAE OF WASHINGTON)
COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH)
E
C
ss.
Signature of Applicant Owner, or
Representative
On this date, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in a d I for the State
of Washington, duly commissioned and sworn, personally' appeared
who, being duly sworn, on his/her -oath deposes and says that (-&.)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/4,o--r free and
voluntary act and deed for the purposes therei entioned.
Subscribed afid sworn to before me this -,!?'N�m day of 19&
T-
RECEIVED
NcAary /�ublic in and for the State of Washington,
MAY residing at 't-,4 -6
Oir. Of Public Works
om
rdV
W., R
N
DECLARATIONS OF APPLICANT
Please answer all questions
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?
251T
2. How does your property differ from other property in the same
vicinity?
r , 1 2
A
+T+""V5-1 C"A-[ C�0"�D (-T10T\j1
3. Will this variance be detrimental to the p�blic or damaging to
oth.e.r property or improvements in the vicinity?
r0cm-
3F:
AKE co o6-
4. What hardships will result to you if the variance is not granted?
Will these hardships have been caused by your own action?
MA112 P6SO LAA� le- _0C_A*TT-_ -F4E-
5. Can you make reasonable use of your property without the variance?
vi-�� L�L
AT
OE 791E LKIEHLIT- DE
Ll EMD -ID
MAY 12 1980
Dir. Of Puhlm Vviorks
j I' r,,"AILE
It
Se per are
for DrlVe WO-j
Q 2
CXK
kill
In's
in
, "14
st
Wavc
writ.
-4., MAY 12 1980
(4io- �4,orks
r u
4
15�
DATE 0'/ "( FILE# A,06 -135 - 7
CITY OF EDMONDS
APPLICATION
to the
ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD
,4,p�0,60 Ck �; 14 0 ?�-C
SITE PLAN
BUILDING PLANS (3): ELEVATIONS
LANDSCAPE PLAN
ENVIRONMENTAL DATA Receipt #
SIGN EXHIBITS (3)
PLAN MODIFICATIONS TO FILE NUMBER:
HEARING DATE
OWNER/REPRESENTATIVE 1
U-A;2�SPHONE "776-2454 279 --gZt�k
ADDRESS -409 MAwi 5,r —ZIP CODE
4j /8PP-SPHONE
CONTACT PERSON �A A,2.�,A OkL-(- 779 -7-L-77
ADDRESS 6 DE- 9,SOZO
ARCHITECT/ DES I GNER PHONE.
PROPERTY ADDRESS 6201 t4X(" S--F- ZONING 13. C,
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
\-IC)L-
PLANS SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL:
1. Building Plans — Preliminary F inal
Site Plan -Landscape Plan >e_ Elevations >e_'
2. Sign Elevations Site Plan Landscape Plan,
3. Modification of previous approval
EXISTING USE OF PROPERTY ��Ies
F0 k �G, -i r Ij ��Cl I L
DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL --T--3
APPROXIMATE DATE WORK WILL BEGIN ON PROJECT
ESTIMATED TIME FOR COMPLETION'OF WORK' 90
I (we) hereby certify to the best of my (our) knowledge, that the:statements and
information contained herein are, in all respects, true and correct.
RECEIVED
019,80
12/78 C17Y Of' Uwo,�JDS
PLANNING DEPr.'
111_��
(Signaturi of Applicant)
RECENED
MAR 24 1980
Dir. Of P01ic Works
f
co
09AM311
-,14 a
CI.
X.QE -VIll
T4
MFW5,W-d&Rw /-Joe %-1 v^ vk-1-ft V7 0 C.L'v%%
101
%,-q Id IOU
VA 05 -7.
Iwo
177
ANA^'
75
IWO vrmw"aaHe—:F r
rn
t Ito
a ills R
(114A 4
JA
bew-
- 144t.4
70 1 IL
ArvoL
Tio, k;
m(A;,
td xu')
LLJ
04 1 L
R"k-fl,
Fl.
P
W1
"JA
N& +I.
p STXT4
0 -R C 716
CD
0
P 3
CO
CD
Cn
R.kj;"?d
lhl�o
114+14 m
601 fu"-\ r+m�' la"O'Ndf
Lok cite ! 36 K 110'
=,e-CE77/73D
;—Ty s
.'U.Nrx'
PrD
Memo to: Planning Department
From: Engineering Division
Subject: A.D.,B. Conmients of April 3, 1980 Meeting
Page -2-
ADB-27-80 JOHN BARTLETT - "BALINKAS" - 104 5th Ave. No., Edmonds., WA.
Engineering does not object to these awnings as long
0
as they have more than eight feet (8') clear above
sidewalk and do not project into areas occupied bv
vehicular traffic.
ADB 135-79 LAURENCE & CAROLYUNE HARRIS - 134 3rd Ave. No., Edmonds,WA .
1) Engineering comments of January 2, 1980 are amended
to accept two (2) parking stalls with the provision that
business use of building exclud-Les medical/dental clinic-
iise per CU-74-79.
6,;q 2) Parking stalls sbould be dimensioned on plan as
9' x 20' with two feet clear from alley line to accomi-.,io-'
date screening.
3) Engineering recommen ds thrce feet (3') maximum height
of screening at North and South sides of 24' parking en-
trance/exit.
JAMI-,S E. ADAMS P.E.
Jr,-A/jf City Fngineer
Attachments
January 2, 1980
MEMO TO: Planning.Department
FROM: Engineering Division
SUBJECT: A.D.B. COMMENTS FOR 1-2-80 14EETIDIG
1. ADB-124-79 - BLUME DEVELOPMENT CO. Review of plan for three
fourplex apartment buildings at 8704-8210 242nd Street SW;
RN111CG
Drainage plan per Ord. #1924 required in conjunction with building
permit. Parking layout satisfactory given unusual shape of
site, although it should be noted that should this property b'e
subdivided in future, provision for granting parking rights from
eastern unit to western unit for four stalls shall be required
Access to the east only on 242nd Street. State 30' and City 5'
easement to be vacated prior to issuance of building permit.
Also 10' dedication required per official Street 11ap. Engineering
does not object to amendment of O.S.M. to change right-of-way
required on 242nd Street from 60 ft. to 50 ft. with adequate -
provision for a turn -around at east end of right-of-way. These
comments are subject to receipt of title report showing actual
property boundaries.
ADB-125-78 - DR. CURTIS SMITH - Review of plan for medical
ottices at the southwest corne—r of 76th Avenue West and 195th
Street S.W.
Drainage Plan required Der Ord. #1924 in conjunction with
building permit. Eastern parking lot to be widened by 2 feet
and wheel chair ramps required per discussion with architect.
3. ADB-135-79 - LAWRENCE HARRIS - Review of site design for
property at 601 Main.Street.
Parking lot design as submitted unacceptable to Engineering
Division. Re -design with three parking stalls aligned from
north property line to south with access to Sixth Avenue is
suggested per discussion with applicant.
DS: j ak
0
sign of 15 sq. ft. The window signage was of the illuminated reader -
board type. The applicant said there were two 60 watt bulbs to illuminate
the sign at night and it could be flashing or not flashing. He was
advised that flashing would be in violation of the Code. MR. HINTZ
MOVED, SECONDED BY MR. KINDERFATHER, TO APPROVE ADB-132-79, PROVIDED
THE READERBOARD SIGN DOES NOT HAVE A FLASHING LIGHT. MOTION CARRIED.
A short recess was announced.
ADB-133-79 DIAMOND PARKING - Review of landscaping for parking lot at the southwest
corner of Sunset and James Sts. (BC)
Mr. Bowman advised that this item would be continued to the February
meeting.
ADB-134-79 CLAY ENTERPRISES - Review of site plan and elevations for duplex at
19910 76th Ave. W. (RD)
No representative was present for this item. It was moved to the
bottom of the agenda, but no one appeared. CHAIRMAN LaFON THEN MOVED,
SECONDED BY MR. SPANFELNER. THAT ADB-134-79 BE CONTINUED TO THE FEBRUARY
MEETING. MOTION CARRIED.
ADB-135-79 LAURENCE and CAROLYN HARRIS - Review of preliminary site plan and
elevations for professional office at 601 Main St. (BC)
The'applicants wished to restore an old house to use as a professional
office building and had received a Conditional Use Permit for this
use. Colors had not yet been decided and the landscaping plan was to
be submitted later. The Engineering Division found the site plan
unacceptable and had recommended a revision. At this time the applicants
were requesting approval of the elevations only. The existing structure
will not be altered significantly but will be restored. Mrs. Harris
said they had not yet selected the colors. Mr. Harris stated there
will be a new roof, probably of asphalt or asphalt shingles. The
siding will not be replaced except for some which is broken. He said
more windows may be added. He planned to have a cathedral ceiling
about 2/3 of the distance from the front to the back and to have
bronze flush mounted skylights to provide extra light. MR. KINDERFATHER
MOVED, SECONDED BY MR. SPANFELNER, TO GIVE PRELIMINARY APPROVAL TO
ADB-135-79 FOR.RENOVATION OF THE HOUSE. Chai man LaFon advised the
applicants that preliminary approval would allow them to start working.
Mr. Hintz was concerned about the skylights, noting that they should
not extend above the ridge line of the other portion of the roof.
Chai man LaFon said they would be lowered because of necessity in the
construction of the house. THE MOTION CARRIED.
ADB-123-79 PORT OF EDMONDS - Review of preliminary site plan and elevations for
business Fa—rkat the southwest corner of Dayton St. and SR 104 (IP)
Herb Carpenter of Reid, Middleton & Associates was present to review
the proposal and ask for comments for the draft EIS. No decisions
viere to be made by the Board. Mr. Carpenter asked for criticism and
suggestions, but no formal action. He said approximately 1/3 of the
area will be required for existing uses in the marina area which will
move to this business park. Seven buildings are proposed with 200,000+
sq. ft. of building area. Both points of access will be from Dayton
St., with a loop road system on the site. Buildings will be two
stories and will have a unified identification system. Three parking
locations were shown which were in excess of the parking requirements,
and Mr. Carpenter indicated the uses of those areas may be flexible.
Mr. Kinderfather commented that this development should be an asset to
Edmonds, but he was concerned that the the kind of retail and commercial
development not be such that would take away from the strength of the
downtown area. He said he would like to see the retail business be
marine oriented so it does not compete with the downtown. Mr. Carpenter
did not think there would be a conflict. He noted that the downtown
ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD
Page 5 - January 2, 1980
12/78
9
CITY OF EDMONDS
APPLICATION
to the
ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD
DATE FILE
SITE PLAN
BUILDING PLANS (3): ELEVATIONS
LANDSCAPE PLAN
ENVIRONMENTAL DATA Receipt #
SIGN EXHIBITS (3)
PLAN MODIFICATIONS TO FILE NUMBER:
HEARING DATE
OWNER/REPRESENTATIVE PHONEZ,?Z--
ADDRESS /36
C Z I P CODE
CONTACT PERSON
PHONE
ADDRESS ZIP CODE
ARCHITECT/DESIGNER
HONE
I
PROPERTY ADDRE8S�-6�0- -W,-a-,--ZC)NING
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
'�- �'C4
PLANS SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL:
1. Building Plans -1-�Preliminary Final
Site Plan- Landscape Plan Elevations
2. Sign Elevations Site Plan Landscape Plan
3. Modification of previous approval
EXISTING USE OF PROPERTY
APPROXIMATE DATE WORK WILL BEGIN ON F
ESTIMATED TIME FOR COMPLETION'OF WORE
I (we) hereby certify to the best of my (our) knowledge, that the statements and
information contained herein are, in all respects, true and correct.
oavv'Ev)
tjE� ? 0' -, q
��Jx 0 L ' ' mus
FIANNING k0l
W��
(Signaturje�of Applicant)
be- -4v S000q
P(-%'JCAk-j �VRT-% �Tkv 'E"�VW�tq ( 4, ""f - 4, %a baf
Xiv
g?
f
a
.
cr)
0
E
LLI
C,2
a 4�
cD
C:
.
;2�:
.2�-
a E
E
0
OLI
11111111 1w
Gfrow. x qo')
F-0 O"A"(f kO
F(A I A;n All -
?I 11�4i s
�q�j,d Ottv%
SC,fq.tv%;.%) (i
pyv- 1-� 11-N-1 e%u V A P�k,
6ol fvw,,-\
P(04M.iOnC4( ALP- �?Qkt
Lite. 36 Y, 110,
Ckul,?: Vq% 3'
LA-4
uj
Lo
0
oil
be lowered 2'. The side setback requirement is 10' and the structure
existed 7' from the side property line. The rear setback was revealed to
be adequate. Mr. Pearson said this structure commands a fine view of eight
or nine neighbors' lots and in the past the use of the treehouse had been a
nuisance to the neighbors. The Police Department had advised him that
illicit activities had been conducted there and there had been complaints
filed. He recommended denial of the application because the structure had
been a nuisance in the past and it provides the opportunity for invasion of
privacy and nuisance to the neighborhood. City Attorney Larry Martin
advised the Board that it had the power to grant a variance to the Zoning
Code with regard to the height of the structure, but it did not have the
power to grant a variance to the Building Code requirement which is 35'.
The public portion of the hearing was opened. The applicant said the
treehouse had been in its current location for 12 years and this was the
first time anyone had complained about it. He felt the structural integrity
of the treehouse had little to do with what was going on at this hearing,
but rather that a neighbor had complained about the treehouse. He felt the
complaints as to its being a nuisance were out of order at this hearing and
he said he would want to have more specific complaints. He stated that the
treehouse is not visible when the trees have leaves and that it now is used
very little. He wanted to keep it because his children had constructed it,
it had been there a long time, and he did not think it was doing anybody
any harm. He added that it consists of a -platform of 2x6's so there is no
maintenance. The public portion of the hearing was closed. Mr. Leraas
commented that since it is a structure it would have to be removed to lower
it 2'. He noted that to approve it would not be consistent with past
actions regarding treehouses or playhouses. Mr. Byrd said that in examining
the variance criteria it did not appear that this structure met the criteria,
particularly in view of the fact that it will have to be lowered anyway,
and it did not appear to be of any value to the applicant in the moved
condition. Mrs. McGee commented that there was nobody in the audience to
complain about the treehouse, and she wondered how it had come up since it
had existed for 12 years. She noted that "not even a letter had been received
and the neighbors had the option to appear or write a letter if they opposed
an application. MR. LERAAS MOVED, SECONDED BY MR. BYRD, TO DENY V-78-79
BECAUSE IT DOES NOT FIT INTO THE BUILDING HEIGHT LIMITATIONS UNDER THE CITY
.CODE AND DOES NOT MEET THE SIDE YARD SETBACKS. A ROLL CALL VOTE WAS TAKEN
.ON THE MOTION, WITH MR. LERAAS, MR. BYRD, AND MR. ROY VOTING YES, AND WITH
MRS. McGEE VOTING NO. MOTION CARRIED. The applicant stated he intended to
appeal. City Attorney Martin advised him that the only procedure for
appeal was to the Superior Court. The applicant responded that he understood
that and he intended to do so.
CU-74-79 LAURENCE- - HARRIS-- -Coytdtti onal Use Permit for professional office at 601
T-lain St
The proposal was to have a professional office in an existing house which
will be remodeled. The house has approximately 800 sq. ft. so it would
require only one parking space if converted to an office that has no customer
service. With customer service it would require a minimum of two parking
spaces. The only place for parking is in the rear area and four parking
spaces were proposed exiting to an alley. Mr. Pearson felt that because of
the size of the area it would be better to have only two parking spaces
directly off the alley. The parking would be reviewed by the ADB. The
property is located on the boundary of the downtown business area and an RM
area and the lot is only 30' wide. Mr. Pearson recommended approval. The
public portion of the hearing was opened. The applicant said the intent
was to restore the building and maintain the existing architecture. Upon
review he also felt that two parking spaces would be a more reasonable
approach to the parking, with possibly an additional compact car space.
The public portion of the hearing was closed.- Mr. Leraas felt the restoration
was commendable. Mr. Byrd asked for a clarification of what is meant by
"professional offic'es." Mr. Pearson explained the three categories of
professional offices and said this would exclude medical or dental uses.
Mrs. McGee said she liked to see old houses like that one kept but she was
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
Page 3 - November 21, 1979
concerned about the parking, noting that employees need a place to park
also. After further discussion, MRS. McGEE MOVED, SECONDED BY MR. LERAAS,
TO APPROVE CU-74-79 AS IT WOULD NOT BE INJURIOUS OR DETRIMENTAL TO ADJOINING
PROPERTIES AND WILL BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE USES IN THE AREA, BUT WITH THE
PROVISION THAT THE BUILDING NOT BE USED FOR MEDICAL OR DENTAL OFFICES.
MOTION CARRIED.
V-79-79. GORDON-WAILER-- Va iance from the required side yard setback at-8005
1011
Mr. Pearson explained that the proposal was to extend the line of the
existing house which is 10 1/2' from the side property line rather than the
required 17 1/2'. Slides of the site were shown. Mr. Pearson said the
variance was not large and would not affect the adjoining property owner to
a great degree. His only objection to approval was that it appeared that a
design could be developed that would not require a variance. The public
portion of the hearing was opened. Don Westlin, architect for the applicant,
said when this house was constructed the 10' setback was adequate but the
property was not within the City of Edmonds. He now wished to add to the
house. Mr. Westlin noted that the house is not parallel to the side line
and it does comply in some places. Walter Moss of 8011 Talbot Rd. asked if
anything would be added to the west side of the house (the Sound side).
Nothing was shown on the plan. Mr. Westlin said there would be an additional
patio area included but it would cause no encroachment. The public portion
of the hearing was closed. MR. LERAAS MOVED, SECONDED BY MRS. McGEE, TO
APPROVE V-79-79 BECAUSE IT APPEARED THAT THE EXTENSION OF THE EXISTING
HOUSE LINE WILL ENCROACH INTO THE SETBACK BUT IT WILL NOT BE DETRIMENTAL TO
THE HEALTH, WELFARE, AND SAFETY OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. MOTION CARRIED.
V-80-79 �tC- S T E fN—K C--'7-Viarianie to allow more than three homes on a private road at
1048 Walnut-St.--(RS'-6)
This private road is a 30' wide easement and four lots potentially could
use the easement without the proposed subdivision of four lots. Mr. Pearson
said 30' was an adequate pavement width to accommodate even seven homes if
all were to use it. The Engineering Division had no objection, and Mr.
Pearson recommended approval. He showed a slide of the site. The public
portion of the hearing was opened. Mike Brown, representing the applicant,
said the short subdivision had been approved subject to the granting of the
variance and all City requirements would be met. Mr. Pearson noted that
there was a letter in the file from Helen Tripp objecting to the proposal.
David Brudvik of 147 Spruce asked that the application be denied because
approval would cause traffic to increase very much. He has a pool and he
said his privacy would be invaded. Helen Tripp said she had written a
letter to protest this because of the increase in traffic. She felt three
lots in the subdivision would be enough and two would be better. Chai man
Roy then read her letter which objected to an increase of traffic on the
private road. Mel Steinke, the applicant, said he was acting for a Mr.
Palm, the owner of the land, who Mr. Steinke said is the person who owned
the land and sold to the people now in the area. He was asking for four
lots because the area is zoned for 6,000 sq. ft. lots. Mr. Steinke said
easements were existing in 1955 and the owner just wanted that to which he
was entitled. Chai man Roy stated he had lived in this area and moved away
in 1959 and he had built the Tripp house, but he had no further involvement
with that property. City Attorney Martin asked if anyone present objected
to the fact that Mr. Roy had been involved with that property prior to
1959. There was no objection. Jurgen Sauerland of Lovell-Sauerland and
Associates stated there would be 18' of asphalt for the road. He noted
that when the property was subdivided in the past there was only a 30'
access easement, and if that easement had been 40' there would be no problem
now. Mr. Brudvik asked where the utilities would run and Mr. Sauerland
responded that it was not yet determined. He said the individual water
service lines would be run through the easement but it had not yet been
resolved whether it would be on the north or south side of the easement.
Mr. Brown said this was the only viable access to the property; they had
looked for alternative"s but -there were none. Mrs. McGee asked if an easement
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
Page 4 - November 21, 1979
APPLICATION
for
The City of Edmonds SIDE SEWER PER1VUT
NEW CONSTRUCTION 0 REPAIRS EASEMENT No . ..........................................
102-05200
OWNER...... Tur-ner,.-Mary --- A ....... .......................................................... CONTRACTOR ............................................................... .................................. PERMIT No . ......... ............
ADDRESS ..601.11ain ... St ......................................................................... LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT No . .............................................. BLOCK No . ............................................
Is
NAME OF ADDITION
Ij
r
Dye Tested On Sewer
July, 1972
Approved:
DATE....................................... ........ By ........................................................... ..........
4ff 1z/y7W
4z
File No
CITY OF EDMONDS
I � - -Da te lb
EDMONDS, WASHINGTON
25.00
0.
0.
APPLICATION TO BOARD OF ADJUS174ENT E2
FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT HEARING DATE
APPLICANT
UMhDRESS -7
Indicate type or degree Of interest in the property:
OWNER:�- "4 � (I- L I&,,,
_ADDRESS /,,I A) NONE:ZLPf-Z6, S - Z7�,
LOCATION OF PROPERTY(ADDRESS):
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY:
To be completed by the Planning Dept: Use Zone
±Mhl Legal description checked and
approved by:
Date: —
VICINITY SKETCH: PLEASE SHOW BELOW A VICINITY SKETCH AS PER EXAMPLE, INDICATING NORTH.
Example: A/
A
MA)IJ
N
CONDITIONAL USE REQUESTED: -22,X- �1if16':)J11.6(-7111ft'—
DETAILS OF PROPOSED USAGE:
Id
!,�ellJe
Sigpa ure Ot Applicant. Owner, or
Rep sen ati
STATE OF WASHINGTON ss. (S�L vrr�
COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH
On this date, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Publi in and for the St �e 91'
Washington, duly commissioned and sworn, persona I ly appeared
,who being duly sworn, on J*-4/ oath &poses and says that
(s)he li�-s —prepared and read the foregoing statements and has acknowledged to me that the
recitat I ons 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 day of 19
—4
NOTARV PUBLIC. In and for the State of
Washington, residing at--,?
0
t
/r" #_7 0,= 6 N P.5
1P.00 E PANVI RE-4lujXEMP_'Alr.5
OZO ..:-S?',4lVA0.4P.D5 I t
154 ne)�(016 i NAAAi7 1.4'Ue0nc--P_ ile,avaly"jo-P #I:
S.-J. A Pfl-ICAAJT�: APPRE.5�
a,Z.. OWNEK�; NAME -
0 ? MA tAl - � r, ( C-0,
A so u-e
Appp,.E,.s5 601. MAIN $7-;
__ - �W_- � : -
RLrVIEWE-93
Ree-'.cf VAT9
-,djaC.F1l.Ei PATE.
16M .7-0
lv5fca &/IILCP)?
5; 1 rE LOCA71OM: APDAE5�5
,L E 6�AL. t7,=Sce/P7-/oA/:.- -1.40t 'fo 040ek ?a eiry '0�c Eq(o..ld Al WS
F1 L. Lc f4 6AIRINC- H.6 A P ),VC,�
j VA rS R'E 5 64,L r s RE-
P-.4r e
V- - /4 - 96 'offovz�l
Cq- 74- -7 11 - Z I - 7 f'; A fAr-o ve4 1-1/com d; ri
1-7,-tO _cloiv' 716e P-e=lt Phi" 5;)
jo'R D -
p
cp-
E-1 .. 5
(:)THep � i
IF
5 1 TE PL A hI YI(i.5 'VCALE YL$
J9,7. PQSLIC. LR irmr oF WAY:�Exisrmcr Ivor'
-A&0-10 qo� rpoposEp tJI* EA.SEMENTS
.,4 K o,q iv P.
-S'd-OZOI DED)CAVDIV
-parmir, 464; P A 0 P 0 s C- 0 AA 'zo N 6-
i lot $4 6cd m
R, _F7',
4 5- H CW -1 E ki ' 31'.T/ N e, 14111'lr4l A)O
W4 r E, 1� �J. e.)
;570RM !;EWEP,
FIRE HYPR,4N77-S-- A')10 Wk; P-04'E�IVAW N 10 'r&L6 . 080141c"7411F A)O 'eAC -06
9ETENTla'A) '"1Jry$r,5M5j 5 T � Lc i F r 1. 16,qT�; A)Q
vn!EAM Oft WATE&J30 Py NIA
Vo 49/m
6.7. .5IVZ-tVALK'4`P'4A.Vr1Aj-' o�#;cxreNOP? 06'
rR
PROfe"ED-OlAr ; ADIDEP Rel�ll? til'A
)ATr6c_HlEP'
RE:L'6ASE $r,47*C-146N)- Is;?/lido
9SA. ttJOCAJAJ
.,jS.7. N6rE* r&A r AF,00-Cr
WR to J, ALId.4 �710
oAcj_cl_- xcl4fAlfo'p A4'e C/1 e. q11p c
SPECIPle. lreM5 7-6 9,ff� "R6VIE WED IN APDlrl6Ai 'rO '(9EAIEPAL PEQUIREMENIS:
l'S.6F UTILITY'WI.RES SEPrlc TANK
IS-30 DRAINAQE ).a.'jo. GRAP1A16-_; 9E.j-A1411NC_'WAL.LS
is Fo oFmc/AL r7REEr Al.6(p .4cruw- je&ro RIGHT 0 F WAYACrICAI_E��,
19,70 STREE7'USEpEPAvr 7 19.94p �STRE'ETS - - -
Z#1
16.9016r.0 CYRS+ C"rs DR1116WAY 546PES �'JS,AS'.�'rAffr,TREES
19.85'.oCO VISJOILITY ly
-C,11>EIVALK�,FZAIV7'IAIC-'.57RIP .. ... .
OR653; FLOCk ARFA 000 �46
i- a r 6 Nt o m qx 1 9 e�
(2, F e-.04 q q m
i' C4,eQr ol;&4 roAl A Ue'y I *)�A
V
4-x It
0
/3
Lu
B P
C2 IE RT� R E, PUBUC ACCOUKITI[f%N,
--- - ---------
-00
00 00
'3c9
A/
0
0 E
%omlwm-m 9920 EDMONDS WAY THIS ORIGINAL ARTWORK is
all m 0 PROTECTED UNDER FEDERAL Uw
EDMONDS, WA 98020 NO REPRODUCTIONS PERWrTED
OF THIS DESIGN CONCEPT
G=;KiRG�06:�Z)ao 206-775-1546 WITHOUT WRITTEN APPROVAL
CUENT: HAWK, SWI)V SIGN DESCRIPTION: D/F- COST: 5414 2'/Ztl
& cov�%PAA�/ I moo w/rainwc J44)(,T2— I P0-,-r/lAlSr 10Z -'�
6/0
co pp'5
cp
so
() C.,
51 cl
f or�
0:
L�)9
0
, p
A DV U/
(Coo JYL(J) n-A
C E r!: MiLRIED PUBUC MMOUNTAM
c) /0
0
0
r
3
3
d-.O* Ir *IIFK le —i
r -7-40 ap 42f '"I
Rz -'guvpt46 4�CA
W4 LP-
Z 77-/ * VC Al
I
ALLE*,
.-00
WIN
I
RECEIVED
MAR 2 4 1980
Dir. of Pljhlir. works