Loading...
7704 OLYMPIC VIEW DR (2).pdf0 FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW BEFORE THE EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL Consolidated Hearing Application of Charles Maki to vacate unused right-of-way lying west of Olympic View Drive north of 184th Street, to amend the official street map to remove plan lined rights -of -way of 184th Street S.W. 253 feet of right-of-way of 184th Street S.W., to vacate public right-of-way between Olympic View Drive and 76th Avenue W. and an approximately 10 to 20-foot-wide portion of the public right-of-way on the west side of Olympic View Drive north of 184th Street. File No.: ST-96-77, ST-96-78 PROCEDURAL HISTORY This matter came on for a consolidated hearing before the Edmonds City Council on September 3, 1996. Applications to amend the City's official street map to remove 60-foot right-of-way between Olympic View Drive and 80th Avenue W. commencing just north of 184th Street S.W., to vacate an unopened portion of a 20-foot-wide public right-of-way line between Olympic View Drive and approximately 176th Avenue W. and to vacate approximately 10 to 20-foot-wide portion of the public right-of-way located on the west side of Olympic View Drive running north approximately 184th Street S.W. for approximately 270 feet, were combined with an application to amend the City's official street map to remove plan lined 60-foot-wide right-of- way between Olympic View Drive and 80th Avenue W. starting just north of 184th Street S.W., reduce the plan lined right-of-way for 184th Street S.W. commencing at Olympic View Drive westerly for approximately 253 feet, and to remove a plan lined right-of-way lying west of Olympic View Drive and north of 184th Street S.W. All the proposed requests are located either adjacent to or across the following property addresses: 7704 Olympic View Drive, 18325 80th Avenue W., and 18408 79th Pl. W. This decision is based upon the record -before the Edmonds City Council and the record and recommendation of the City's Hearing Examiner. The recommendations of the Hearing Examiner dated July 26, 1996, are adopted as the Council's findings and conclusions except as specifically amended herein. ADDITIONAL TESTIMONY AND INFORMATION At the City Council hearing, the staff recommendation was amended and differed from that presented to the Hearing Examiner. The Hearing Examiner in his findings at page 10, recommendation 4, recommends denial of the request to remove from the official street map of the plan lined right-of-way adjacent to Olympic View Drive. Staff recommended to the City Council that, in conjunction with the platting process, the City's interest of providing slope stability could be achieved through the creation of a native growth protection easement for slope ® t. �- Lai stability rather than a full taking of the property as right-of-way. The purpose for the additional right-of-way was to control vegetation on the slope to enhance stability and that same objective can be achieved through the less intrusive means of a native growth protection easement. z 11 _ In the course of the hearings, the applicant acknowledged his willingness to await final L&` approval of the vacations and street map amendment until such time as development approval < for the property located at 7704 Olympic View Drive, 18325 80th Avenue W. and 18408 79th U o Pl. W. is finally granted. The exact location of interior streets, connections and other required LU mitigations cannot be finally ascertained until such approvals are complete. LU (n 01 CONCLUSIONS ' W The Edmonds City Council therefore concludes that the purposes and objectives of the u 3 yy, <n 1. Edmonds Community Development Code will be met by: CO z Lu z Z 1. Amendment of the Official Street Map to delete the plan line for 60 feet of right- ; O of -way between Olympic View Drive and 80th Avenue W. in accordance with w w- Exhibit A, Attachment 5, to the Bearing Examiner's recommendation. U (0!; 2. Amendment of the Official Street Map to delete the plan lined extension of 184th o Street S.W. lying east of the proposed plat road, retaining any existing utility _ �(` easement and to maintain future provisions for utilities. See Exhibit A, Attachment 5, to the Bearing Examiner's recommendation. w o; _Z U �?' 3. Deny amendment of the official street map to delete the plan lined extension of a= 184th St. S.W. lying west of the proposed plat road. In conjunction with the z subdivision and development approval for the subject property, that section of right-of-way may be required to be widened and relocated to accommodate a future 184th St, S.W. street extension between the unopened right-of-way south of lot 11 and the future plat road. 4. Approval of the amendment of the official street map to remove 20 feet of right- of-way adjacent to Olympic View Drive contingent upon: a. Approval of a 20-foot-wide native growth protection easement along the O applicant's frontage along Olympic View Drive, the extent and nature of which will be determined as a part of the platting approval process. b. The provision to the City within 21 calendar days to the date of approval of a legal description for the native growth protection easement. € C. The payment of compensation for the vacated property in accordance with the submitted appraisal adjusted in accordance with provisions of state law and City ordinance. 2- _.. © r1 i ....dm.:.-... 5. The future application to develop the property owned by the applicant is and shall be subject to all applicable requirements contained in the Edmonds Community Development Code. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to ensure compliance with the various provisions contained in those ordinances. Nothing herein shall be interpreted to prejudge or limit the discretion of the City Council in reviewing such application(s) to finally determine the placement and appropriate route of interior roads and utilities and to mitigate the impacts, if any, from the development. In order to provide for a orderly process, the City Council directs that the City Attorney prepare ordinances for vacation and ordinances amending the official street map. These ordinances shall be held and presented to the City Council only in conjunction with an approved development plan providing for adequate alternative connections for roads, pedestrian and bike ways, and utilities in the area. Part of the City Council's required Findings and Hearing Examiner's Recommendations regarding the proposed vacations and amendments to the Official Street Map are a finding that the actions are in accordance with the policies of the Comprehensive Plan and the provisions of the Community Development Code. This finding is based in part upon the assumption that future access will be provided during development of the property,, Therefore, it is inappropriate to finally adopt ordinances of vacation or amending the Master Street Map until such time as a platting or other development process makes provision for access. DONE this 27th day of September , 1996. Attest: W- el� Sandra S. Chase, City Clerk WN14 wAYIMASWI M Mayor Barbara S. Fahey = Zr i w t) �o w' cn u. O: w} LL Q al Fes- _ z_ I- H d wLAJ n � w wI s L) u. p �z W U) Uz or z "7 €u7 H T �v. Item #: EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL, Agenda Memo Originator: Planning Division For Action: X For Information: Subject: HEARING ON A REQUEST TO AMEND THE CITY'S OFFICIAL STREET MAP TO REMOVE THAT PORTION OF A PROPOSED 60-FOOT WIDE RIGHT-OF-WAY DESIGNATION BETWEEN OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE AND 80TH AVENUE WEST STARTING JUST NORTH OF 184TH STREET SOUTHWEST. ADDITIONALLY, THE APPLICANT REQUESTS TO REMOVE THE DESIGNATION OF THE EXISTING 20-FOOT WIDE RIGHT-OF-WAY OF. 184TH STREET SW STARTING AT OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE AND PROCEEDING WEST APPROXIMATELY 263 FEET; AND REMOVE THE DESIGNATION OF A PORTION OF THE UNUSED RIGHT -OF -WAY -LYING WEST OF OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE AND NORTH OF THE 184TH STREET SOUTHWEST RIGHT-OF-WAY, TO ALLOW A VACATION OF THE SUBJECT RIGHTS -OF -WAY PURSUANT TO AN APPLICATION SUBMITTED UNDER CITY OF EDMONDS PLANNING DIVISION FILE NO, ST-96-78. ALL OF THE PROPOSED REQUESTS DISCUSSED ABOVE ARE LOCATED EITHER ADJACENT TO OR ACROSS THE FOLLOWING PROPERTY ADDRESSES: 7704 OLYMPIC VIEW DR., 18326 BOTH AVE. W, AND 18408 79TH PL. W. (Applicant: Charles Maki / File No: ST-96-77) Agenda Time: 40 Minutes Agenda Date: September 3, 1996 Exhibits Attached: 1. Vicinity Map 2. Hearing Examiner's "Findings and Recommendation (issued 7/26/96). 3, Staff Advisory Report to the Hearing Examiner (dated 7/3/96). 4. Letter and map from Mr. Maki Clearances: Departmentlinitials Admin Svcs/Finance Community Svcs City Attorney Engineering - City 1°�(/ CIerk Parks & Rec Court Planning Personnel Public W ks Fire Treatment Plant Police City Council Mayor Reviewed by Council Finance Committee; Community Services Public Safety Approved for Consent Agenda: Recommend Review by Full Council: Expenditure Amount Appropriation Required: $ 0 Budgeted: $ 0 Required: $ 0 Funding Source: Not Applicable Previous Council Action: z Narrative: sw', g The applicant has applied for an amendment to the City's Official Street Map to delete a proposed 60- foot right-of-way between Olympic View Drive w M and 80th Avenue West. Additionally, he is seeking to remove a portion of the existing 20-foot wide right-of-way from Olympic View Drive o' U) and proceeding west 253-feet. Finally, the applicant is seeking the removal of the unused right-of-way along Olympic View Drive (see Exhibit 4, Attachment A). z F-' o There are three principal issues concerning this application: 1) The preservation (or loss) of a possible w-' connection between Olympic View Drive and 80th Avenue West; 2) Slope stability and g �: preservation along Olympic View Drive; and 3) Long term impacts associated with this Official Street Map amendment. cn d r The applicant states that the possible connection between Olympic ViewDrive and 8Oth Avenue West F= z � will be preserved in that the applicant will eventually apply for a Planned Residential Development with z t-' it's associated road that combined with the remaining connection to 184th Street Southwest on the O', applicants property, will insure that, z the applicant will still make provision for a connection. UJ: The applicant has stated that he is willing to grant the City an easement for slope stability along his entire frontage along Olympic View Drive. U cn This will provide the City with greater control over slopes along O ' Olympic View Drive than presently exists. The easement will be wider than the current right-of-way W Wig and will traverse the entire frontage of the applicant's property. The present right-of-way occupies only a x U portion of the applicants frontage along Olympic View Drive (see Exhibit 4, Attachment A). `—` Z' The long term impact from this decision essentially concerns the ability to make a future connection Ui S' between 80th Avenue West and Olympic View Drive. As a condition of approval the applicant should be required to provide some type of connection between Otypic View Drive and his portion of 184th z z Street Southwest. Should engineering studies suggest a different alignment a An ther'alteration of the Official Street Map could take place in conjunction with a proposed subdivision. On July 12, 1996, the Hearing Examiner held a public hearing on the proposed street map amendment. The Hearing Examiner issued his recommendation on July 26, 1996, to approve the requested street map f amendment with conditions (see Exhibit 2). The most significant condition was the requirement to _ widen his portion of the remaining 184th Street Southwest connection to 40-feet from it's current 20- feet. Recommended Action: 0 Adopt the Hearing Examiner's recommendation and approve the application for a street map amendment with the conditions recommended by the Hearing Examiner (see Exhibit 2). Also the applicant shall be required, as part of any development application, to provide a 40-foot wide connection between Olympic View Drive and his portion of 184th Street Southwest. Council Action: t0' Vicinity Map CITY OF EDMONDS BARBARA FAHEY 250 6TH AVENUE NORTH • MAYOR EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (206) 77f•0220 •FAX (208) 771-0221 HEARING EXAMINER cst. 1S9v FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE HEARING EXAMINER CITY OF EDMONDS APPLICANT: Charles Maki CASE NO.: ST 96-77 LOCATION: 7704 Olympic View Drive (see Exhibit A, Attachments 1 and 4) APPLICATION: This application is to amend the City,s Official. Street Map to remove that portion of proposed 60-foot wide right-of-way designation between Olympic View Drive and 80th Avenue West starting just north of 184th 'Street Southwest. Additionally, the applicant wants to: a. remove the designation of the existing 20- foot wide right-of-way of 184th Street Southwest starting at Olympic View Drive and proceeding west approximately 253 feet; and b. remove the designation of a portion of the unused right-of- way lying west of Olympic View Drive and north of 184th Street Southwest right-of-way, to allow a vacation of the subject right -of- . way pursuant to an application submitted under City of Edmonds Planning Division File No. ST-96-78 (see Exhibit A, Attachment 1). REVIEW PROCESS: Street Map Amendment; Hearing Examiner conducts public hearing and makes recommendation to the City Council. MAJOR ISSUES: a. Compliance with Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Section 20.65 (STREET MAP CHANGES). b. Compliance with Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Chapter. 15.05 (COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - PURPOSES). c. Compliance with Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Chapter 15.40 (COMPREHENSIVE STREET PLAN - PURPOSES). d. Compliance with Edmonds Community, Development Code (ECDC) Chapter.18.50 (OFFICIAL STREET MAP). SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff Partial approval with conditions Hearing Examiner: Partial approval with conditions • Incorporated August 11, 1890 a Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan Exhibit. 2 ®;?� i Hearing.Examiner Recommendation Case No. ST 96-77 Page 2 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 Maki application was opened at 10:51 am, July 12, 1996, in the Community Services Conference Room, 250 5`h Avenue, Edmonds, Washington, and closed at 11:50 am. Participants at the public hearing and the exhibits offered and entered are listed this report. A verbatim recording of the hearing.is available in the Planning Division. HEARING TESTIMONY: The following is a summary of the testimony offered at the public hearing. From the City: Kirk Vinish, AICP, Planner, reviewed the Planning Division Advisory Report (Exhibit A) and discussed concerns expressed by neighbors about losing a possible connection to Olympic View Drive. Gordy Hyde, Engineering Coordinator, reviewed the Engineering Division report(Exhibit A, Attachment 6) and said: • When the dotted lines were put on the Official Street Map for rights -of -way designations the roads were not intended to be located exactly within the dotted lines. • The property where the post office is now located was owned by the City and was considered to be a possible fire station location. • The dotted lines indicate a rough location for a connection to Olympic View Drive. • The existing 20 foot wide right-of-way could be used for: + pedestrian access ♦ utility access ♦ emergency access • A' 30 foot wide right-of-way would be needed to allow for a U foot wide roadway. From the Applicant: : John Mellor, Agent for the Applicant, said: • It would be very difficult to widen Olympic Drive in this area due to the topography and removing a portion of the unused right-of-way along Olympic Way would help the applicant with lot yield (0 Hearing Examiner Recommendation Case No. ST 96-77 Page- 3 + A roadway connection would not work in the configuration of the existing 20 foot wide right -of way. 14 sW + The "S" curve shown in dotted lines won't work anymore and should be deleted L From the Community: cs O c"'n w LU Earl Smith, neighbor, gave a history of roads in the area and spoke in favor of vacating the 20 � foot wide right-of-way. to u. i O, g Joe Scialdone, Neighbor' Jim Thompson, Neighbor LL a I Ed Swanson, Neighbor , U Katherine Morley, Neighbor Z 3: Francis LaFond, Neighbor Ww All spoke in favor of keeping an option open to provide an access from 8& Avenue West to = o Olympic View Drive. They said: o r + They didn't think a road could be built in the location of the "S" curve, but felt a tie to Penrinville is critical, fir. z; + They felt a roadway connection from 80t` Avenue West to the proposed cul-de-sac in the LU z� approximate location of the existing 20 foot right-of-way is possible. z • Most didn't think the City should give up any right-of-way on Olympic View Drive. + A lot of traffic now uses 8e West which is a narrow road. Another connection to Olympic View would reduce some of the traffic volume on 80,h West ' + The 20 foot right-of-way should not be vacated, but rather should be explored as a _ possible location for a link between the new cul-de-sac and Olympic View Drive. vr. Response from the Applicant: O John Mellor said: + If the right-of-way along Olympic View Drive were vacated as requested, Olympic Drive would stilt have a 70 foot wide right-of-way. + It would be possible from an engineering standpoint to connect the new cul-de-sac to 8& t West, but the police and fife departments saw no need during the review of the application. + The sight distance on 8e West is tough. + The applicant does not want a connection from 80'b West to Olympic View Drive to go through his new subdivision. 0 X LU wU -' o 0 o U)� UJ UJ Cl) LL� —o w 2 LL =w` z f- f- 0.. w eu �g LaL. = U z: Lu (ni U_ o z E"7 Hearing Examiner Recommendation Case No. ST 96-77 Page 4 ' Response from the City: Kirk Vinish said one option is to remove the right-of-way along Olympic View from the official map, but then have the applicant give the City a maintenance easement. CORRESPONDENCE: Joe Scialdone submitted Exhibit B which was signed by 39 persons. The letter expressed no opposition to any part of the application, except the requested vacation of the eastern of 180 Ave. S.W. between 80" and Olympic View Drive. The residents in the area want to make sure the present or future ability to connect 801' West with Olympic View Drive is not eliminated. The letter had a map attached which showed removal of the "S" curve right-of-way lines and retention of the existing 20 foot wide right-of-way. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS A. SITE DESCRIPTION 1. Site Development And Zoning. a. Facts: 1) Size: The portion of the right-of-way adjacent to Olympic View Drive and the unopened portion of 184th Street Southwest is approximately 7,304 square feet. The proposed 60-foot wide right-of-way designation between Olympic View Drive and 80th Avenue West is approximately 33,000 square feet (see Exhibit A, Attachment 4). 2) Zoning: The zoning of the subject property is . Single -Family Residential (RS-12). 3) Terrain and Vegetation: The subject property has several steep slopes, with all open areas vegetated (see Exhibit A, Attachments 4 and 5). 2. Neighboring Development And Zoning: a. Facts: 1) 'North: Developed with detached single family residences, and zoned RS-12. 2) South: Developed with detached single family residences, and zoned RS-12. 3) East: Developed with detached single family residences, and zoned RS- 12. 4) West: Developed with a U.S. Post Office development and zoned Neighborhood Business (BN). W = z) LU, r .0 _J 10 n Lu J Ln IL o. w� 2 a a1 tiw z ►z- r_ 0 ww U - p F_- LLp —z w(n U:F o� z GE ' s s Hearing Examiner Recommendation Case No. ST 96-77 Page 5 b. Conclusion: The proposed development would be consistent with the surrounding zoning and development. B. STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICIES ACT (SEPA) a. Fact: The application is not exempt from SEPA pursuant to WAC 197-11- 800(6)b. A Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) was issued by the City of Edmonds SEPA Responsible Official on June 6,1996. The Environmental Checklist and Determination are included as Exhibit A, Attachments 2 and 3. b. Conclusion: The applicant and the City have satisfied the requirements of SEPA. 2. Compliance with requirement for a Street Map Amendment IF -CDC Chapter 20.65, states the review criteria for Street Map Amendment Changes. These Criteria include: 1) conformance with the purposes of the City's Comprehensive Plan; 2) conformance with the purposes of the Comprehensive Street Plan; and 3) conformance with the purposes of the Official Street Map. a. Facts: ECDC Section 15.05 is the City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan. The plan states in part, "The Comprehensive Plan shall be consulted as a preliminary to the establishment, improvement, abandonment, or vacation of any street, and no dedication of any street or other area for public use shall be accepted by the city council until the location, character, extent, and effect thereof shall have been considered by the Hearing Examiner with reference to the Comprehensive Plan. The Hearing Examiner's Report on the same will be at the time and part of his or her action on the vacation andlor dedication". The applicant has not provided in his submittal any discussion of his proposal as it relates to the criteria -for a Street Map Amendment. A summary of the proposed Street Map Amendment as it relates purposes of the Comprehensive Plan follows: 1) To serve as the basis for municipal policy on development and to provide guiding principles and objectives for the development of regulations. Hearing Examiner Comments: The proposed Street Map Amendment, as recommended below, will not adversely affect the ability of the City to utilize the Comprehensive Plan far guidance in the establishment of development regulations. 2) To promote the public health, safety, morals, order, convenience, prosperity and the general welfare. Hearing Examiner Comments: Removal of the right-of-way adjacent to Olympic View Drive would significantly impair the City's ability to protect the street from slope failure and development which might affect the slope. The proposed removal from the Official Street Map M M Z.i F- UJ 0 a LU M }-fj UO- LU LL M LU � M, Z I-- r 0 Z � LU LU W LU LL 0 Z: LU 0 Z Z 0 Hearing Examiner Recommendation Case No. ST 96-77 Page 6 of the unopened right-of-way lying west of the proposed plat road as a possible extension of 184 th Street S.W. 14111 adversely affect the public health, safety, morals, order, convenience, prosperity and general welfare. 3) To anticipate and influence the orderly and coordinated development of land and building use of the city and its environs, and conserve and restore natural beauty and other natural resources. Hearing Examiner Comments: The Proposal appears to be consistent and coordinated with development in the immediate vicinity if approved as recommended. 4) To encourage coordinated development and discourage piecemeal, spot or strip zoning and inharmonious subdividing. Hearing Examiner Comments: The proposal, as recommended below, appears to be coordinated with adjacent development and anticipates the eventual subdividing of the property in a manner that appears to be harmonious with the surrounding development. 5) To facilitate adequate provisions for public services such as transportation, police and fire protection, water supply, sewage treatment, and parks. Hearing Examiner Comments: The unopened 184th Street Southwest right-of-way lying east of the conceptual plat can be vacated provided a utility easement is retained. If the proposal is approved as recommended, public services should not be adversely affected by this proposal. b. Facts: ECDC Section 15.40 Comprehensive Street Plan states, "The Comprehensive Street Plan shall have the following purposes, in addition to the general purpose of the comprehensive plan. A. To provide for adoption and enforcement of street andthoroughfare maps and coordinated plan including the official street map to implement the comprehensive plan. B. To facilitate the provision of utilities and transportation. [Ord. 3030 3,19951.11 The following plans have been repealed: Comprehensive thoroughfire plan and the Changes to the plan. A summary of the proposed Street Map Amendment as it relates purposes of the Comprehensive Street plan follows: 1) To provide for adoption and enforcement of street and thoroughfare maps and coordinated plan including the official street map to implement the comprehensive plan. 7 L) o� LU wLU J U.1 U. { N =! _d �z z t- �O Z w w. CJ (n' O ~� LL t7 ujz o~ z to i Hearing Examiner Recorrimendation Case No. ST 96-77 Page 7 Hearing Examiner Comments: The Street and Thoroughfare plans have been repealed. If the conditions as outlined in the recommendations are followed The Official Street Map will continue to provide an effective means of implementing City policy with regard to the development of streets in the vicinity of the proposal. 2) To facilitate the provision of utilities and transportation. [Ord 3030 § 3,19951. Hearing Examiner. Comments: Utilities and transportation in the immediate vicinity should not be impaired by the proposal if the recommendations are followed. C. Fact: ECDC Section 18.50 Official Street Map states, "The purpose of this chapter is to: A. Implement the comprehensive street plan. B. Regulate the construction of improvements which could prevent the implementation of the comprehensive street plan; ' A summary of the proposed Street Map Amendment as it relates purposes of the Official Street Map follows: 1) Implement the comprehensive street plan. Hearing Examiner Comments. If the conditions as outlined in the recommendations are followed, the proposal will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan 2) Regulate the construction of improvements which could prevent the implementation of the comprehensive street plan. Hearing Examiner Comments: Section 2.b above discusses conformance with the Comprehensive Street Plan.. It does not appear that the proposal, as conditioned will prevent the implementation of the comprehensive street plan. d) Conclusions: 1) Part of the proposal generally appears to' be consistent with the purposes of the Comprehensive Plan. a. The unopened 184th Street Southwest right-of-way lying east of the conceptual plat can be vacated, however a utility easement needs to be retained. b. The proposal, for removal of the proposed 60 foot right-of- way, generally appears to be consistent with the purposes of the Comprehensive Street Plan. However, it appears that the conditions as recommended in this report are necessary to satisfy the purposes of the Comprehensive Street Plan. F- LU w,' � J U U O cn � w J I— I N 0 � LL may, �a = W. ti =. z� t_ O' w LU O n- U to OG H� it 0 _z W (n U= o~ z KVJ Hearing Examiner Recommendation Case No. ST 96-77 Page 8 2) In order to protect the slopes along Olympic View Drive, the right-of- way adjacent to that street should not be removed from the Official Street Map. 3) The proposal to eliminate the 20 foot wide 18e Street Southeast right- of-way extension west. of the property plat road appears -to be inconsistent with the purposes of the Official Street Map. Lot •11 is adjacent to the west of the subject property has the potential to be subdivided and that subdivision would be served by the 18e St. S.W. extension. There also appears to be a significant need for a roadway connection from 80'h Avenue West to Olympic View Drive which could provided in the future if the right-of-way to the west of the proposed plat road is relocated and expanded. The applicant has not shown that the entire proposal will meet the criteria of Street Map Amendment. However, if the conditions as outlined below are followed, then a portion of the proposal will be consistent with the criteria. . C. TECEMCA,L COMMffTEE 1. Review by City Departments: a. Fact: The Engineering Division had the following recommendations: Approval for removal from the Official Street Map the proposed right-of- way between Olympic View Drive and 80th Avenue West. Approval for the removal from the Official Street Map the unopened 184th Street Southwest right-of-way lying east of the proposed plat road, provided that a utility easement is retained. Approval for removal from the Official Street Map the unopened right-of-way lying west of the proposed plat road, provided the plat road is made public and there is a pedestrian/bike access easement and construction between the proposed plat road and the westerly boundary of the conceptual plat. Denial for removal from the Official Street Map the right-of-way adjacent Olympic View Drive (see Exhibit A, Attachment 6). b. Fact: The Parks & Recreation Department had the following recommendations: Approval with exception of the unopened right-of-way lying west of the conceptual plat unless a pedestrian/bike access easement is provided between the proposed plat road and the westerly boundary of the conceptual plat (see Exhibit A, Attachment 7). C. Fact. The Public Works Department had the following comments and recommendations: A 24-inch water main and a sewer main is located in the right-of-way proposed to be removed from the Official Street Map. At a minimum the Public Works Department recommends that a 10-foot wide easement be required for all locations where City utility lines are located (see Exhibit A, Attachment 8). 6" 9E Hearing Examiner Recommendation Case No. ST 96-77 Page 9 D. COWREHENSWE PLAN (ECDC) 1. Compliance with Comprehensive Plan a. Fact: The subject property is designated as "Single Family Large Lot". b. Conclusion: The conceptual development is consistent with the existing Comprehensive Plan Land Use designation for the site. C. Facts: The Comprehensive Plan, Residential Development section, identifies goals and policies which relate to `Residential Development" 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 lifestyle of Edmonds residents should be maintained and promoted...." d) Conclusion: The conceptual development is consistent with the above adopted goals and policies of the City for the development of residential property in the City. e) Facts: The Comprehensive Plan, Soils and Topography section, identifies goals and polices which are related to this conceptual development. Specific applicable goals and polices are discussed in detail below. 1) Section C states as a goal of the City that: "Development on steep slopes or hazardous soil conditions should preserve the natural features of the site, in accordance with the following policies: C. La. Grading, filling and tree cutting shall be restricted to building pads, driveways, access ways and other impervious surfaces. C.Lb. Grading shall not jeopardize the stability of any slope of an adjacent property." C. l.c. Only minimal amounts of cut and fill on hillsides exceeding 15% slope should be permitted so that the natural topography can be preserved. Fill shall not be used to create a yard on steeply sloped property." f) Conclusion: A portion of the proposed Street Map Amendment is consistent with the above adopted goals and policies of the City providing the recommendations outlined below are followed. \', © �- ®. RECOMMENDATION: Based upon the foregoing findings and conclusions, the following is recommended: 1. Approval for removal from the Official Street Map the ;proposed 60 foot right-of-way between Olympic View Drive and 80th Avenue West (see Exhibit A, Attachment 5). 2. Approval for the removal from the Official Street Map ( the unopened extension 184th Street Southwest 20 foot right-of-way lying east of the proposed plat road, provided that a utility easement is retained (see Exhibit A, Attachment 5). i 3. Denial of removal from the Official Street Map the unopened extension of the 184th Street Southwest right-of-way lying west of the proposed plat toad. Rather, when the subject Property is platted, that section of right-of-way shall be widened and relocated to accommodate a future 184h Street Southwest street extension between the unopened right-of-way south of Lot 11 and the future plat road. 4. Denial of removal from the Official Street Map the right- of-way adjacent to Olympic View Drive. 5. This application is subject to the applicable requirements contained in the Edmonds Community Development Code. It is the responsibility of the applicant to ensure compliance with the various provisions contained in these ordinances. 6. The approval as noted above is transferable. Entered this 26th day of July, 1996, 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 RECONSIDERATION AND COUNCIL ACTION: The following is a summary of the deadlines and procedures : appeals. Any person. wishing to file or respond to a recommendati Planning Department for further procedural information. filing reconsiderations and or appeal should contact the A. REQUEST FOIL 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 W = za w LU -J U o` a (nw -J (nLL OI UL a� cn a 1 z U, z 1�- �-O z ww Uto o F- LIJ = U �- 0 —z �s o~ z 01 Ka Hearing Examiner Recommendation Case No. ST 96-77 Page 11 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. B. CITY COUNCIL ACTION: 1. Normal Review. The City Council will consider a recommendation of the Hearing Examiner at its next available meeting. The Council may adopt or remand the recommendation at that meeting. 2. Optional Public Hearing. If the Council wishes ,to consider any change to the recommendation, the Council shall set a public hearing in the manner provided in Chapter 20.90. After the hearing the Council shall approve, modify, conditionally approve, deny or remand the proposal. EXHIBITS: The following exhibits were offered and entered into the record. A. Planning Division Advisory Report, with 8 attachments B. Letter from Joe Scialdone, dated 717/96 and signed by 39 other persons C. Map of proposed road alignment, submitted by Joe Scialdone PARTIES OF RECORD: Charles Maki 8235 Talbot Road Edmonds, WA 98026 John Mellor 606 Sater Lane Edmonds, WA 98026 Jim Thompson 18305 8& Avenue West Edmonds, WA 98026 Ed Swanson 8111 l Vd S.W. Edmonds, WA 98026 Francis La Fond 18227 80`s Avenue West Edmonds, WA 98026 Han Z. and Regina K. Park. 7704 Olympic View Drive Edmonds, WA 98026 Joe Scialdone 18332 80s` Avenue West Edmonds, WA 98026 Earl Smith 18325 8& West Edmonds, WA 98026 Katherine Morley 18203 8& Avenue West Edmonds, WA 98026 Planning Division Engineering Division Fire Department Parks Department Public Works Department ® ®; CITY OF EDMONDS 250 5TH AVENUE NORTH, EDMONDS, WA 98020 z II ¢�: PLANNING DIVISION W ADVISORY REPORT v ]FINDINGS, CONCLIUSIONS, AND RECOM WENDATIONS cy 0 �w w = To: Ron McConnell, Hearing Examiner Cn wi w / From: (! ag, Q� Kirk J. Vinish ; D 44 PIanner D Y = w ' z� Date: JULY 3 1996 ' File: ST-96-77 I-- CHARLES MAKI w 0 Hearing Date, Time, And Place: July 12 1996 At 9:QQAM, a ~ Community Services Conference Room r , 250 5th Avenue North _0 TABLE OF CONTENTS U 0r Section Page zI. INTRODUCTION...........................................:............................................................................2 A. Application...............................................................:..........,...,...........................,...........2 B, Recommendations...........................................................................................................2 11. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS..........................................................................3' f { A. Site Description...............................................................................................................3 B. State Environmental Policies Act (SEPA).......................................................... ....3 C. Technical Committee.......................................................................................................6 Comprehensive Plan(ECDC).........................................................................................6 OD. III. RECONSIDERATIONS AND APPEALS ....... ....„................,....,.............7 ....................... A. Request for Reconsideration ...........................................................................................7 B. Appeals...; ........................................................................................................................ 7 IV. LAPSE OF APPROVAL ............................................................................................................7 t V. NOTICE TO COUNTY ASSESSOR.........................................................................................7 VI. APPENDICES...........................................................................................................................8 1-- VII. PARTIES OF RECORD..........................................................................................................$ S?96.77.D0C/7u1y xh 96)ghiibit 3 W.� < LLJ U O' V) �. rn LU a t=— U) O! w � y}-- cc Q �d �_- T z I— l— O ww c3 ur O �1 a w! sv �F LL_ p z di to U = Or z lug Charles Meld File No. ST-96-77 Page 2 of a I. IN7C'RUDUCTI®N A. Application 1. Applicant: Charles Maki (see Attachment 1). 2. Site Location: 7704 Olympic View Drive (see Attachments i and 4). 3. Request: Application to amend the City's Official Street Map to remove that portion of proposed 60-foot wide right-of-way designation between Olympic View Drive and 80th Avenue West starting just north of 184th Street Southwest. Additionally the applicant request to remove the designation of the existing 20-foot wide right-of-way of 184th Street Southwest starting at Olympic View Drive and proceeding west approximately 253 feet; remove the designation of a portion of the unused right-of-way lying west of Olympic View Drive -and north of 184th Street Southwest right-of-way, to allow a vacation of the subject right-of-way pursuant to an application. submitted under City of Edmonds Planning Division File No. ST- 96-78 (see Attachment 1). 4. Review Process: Street Map Amendment; Hearing Examiner conducts public hearing and makes recommendation to the City Council. 5. MljjQr Issues: a. Compliance with Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Section 20.65 (STREET MAP CHANGES). b. Compliance with Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Chapter 15.05 (COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - PURPOSES). c. Compliance with Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Chapter 15.40 (COMPREHENSIVE STREET PLAN - PURPOSES). d. Compliance with Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Chapter 18.50 (OFFICIAL STREET MAP). B. Recommendations Based on statements of Fact, Conclusions, and Attachments in this report we recommend partial Approval of this application subject to the following conditions: i- Approval for removal from the Official ' Street Map the proposed right-of-way between Olympic View Drive and 80th Avenue West (see Attachment 5). 2. Approval for the removal from the Official Street Map the unopened extension 184th Street Southwest right-of-way lying east of the proposed plat road, provided that a utility easement is retained (see Attachment 5). 3. Approval for removal from the Official Street Map the unopened extension of the 184th Street Southwest right-of-way lying west of the proposed plat road, provided the plat road is made public and there is a pedestriantbike access easement and construction between the proposed plat road and the westerly boundary of the proposed plat (see Attachment 5).. 4. Denial for removal from the Official Street Map the right-of-way adjacent to Olympic View Drive. 5. This application is subject to the applicable requirements contained in the Edmonds Community Development Code. It is the responsibility of the applicant to ensure compliance with the various provisions contained in there ordinances. 6. The permit should be transferable. ST96 77.DOC1 July 3,19961 Staff Report Charles Maki File No. ST-96-77 Page 3 of 8 II. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS A. Site Description y Z! 1. Site Development And Zoning: 2 a) Fick: LU U (1) Sin: The portion of the right-of-way adjacent to Olympic View Drive and the V) o w unopened portion of 184th Street Southwest is approximately 7,304 square feet. The to proposed 60-foot wide right-of-way designation between Olympic View Drive and � ty- 80th Avenue West is approximately 33,000 square feet (see Attachment 4). V) W L, j 0 (2) Z&ning: The zoning of the subject property is Single -Family Residential (RS-12). 2 (3) Terrain and Ve�e+Qtion: The subject property has several steep slopes, with all LL ? open areas vegetated (see Attachments 4 and 5). i 2. Neighboring Development And Zoning: Z l'- t-- O a) Ems: w w (1) hlwh: Developed with detached single family residences, and zoned RS-12. a (2) South: Developed with detached single family residences, and zoned RS-12. o F (3) E=: Developed with detached single family residences, and zoned RS-12. = i'-y. (4) fit: Developed with a U.S. Post Office development and zoned Neighborhood LL �; Business (BN). _ Z b) Comclusion: The proposed development would be consistent with the surrounding w tn' U = zoning and development. , Z B. State Environmental Policies Act (SEPA) a) FAA- The application is not exempt from SEPA pursuant to WAC I97-11-800(6)b. A Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) was issued by the City of Edmonds SEPA Responsible Official on June 6,1996. The Environmental Checklist and Determination i are included as Attachments 2 and 3. - - j b) Qxhvim: The applicant and the City have satisfied the requirements of SEPA. y l 2. Compliance with requirement for a Street Map Amendment ® ECDC Chapter 20.65, states the review criteria for Street Map Amendment Changes. These Criteria include: 1) conformance with the purposes of the City's Comprehensive Plan; 2) conformance with the purposes of the Comprehensive Street Plan; and 3) conformance with the purposes of the Official Street Map. a) ERSU: ECDC Section 15.05 is the City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan. The plan states in part, "The Comprehensive Plan shall be consulted as a preliminary to the establishment, improvement, abandonment or vacation of any street and no dedication t of any street or other area for public useshall be accepted by the city council until the location, character, extent, and effect thereof shalt have been considered by the Hearing Examiner with reference to the Comprehensive Plan. The Hearing Examiner's Report on the same will be at the time and part of his or her action on the vacation and/or dedication". The applicant has not provided in his submittal any discussion of his proposal as it relates to the criteria for a Street Map Amendment. A summary of the ST96-77.DOC / July 3,1996 t Staff Report Charles Maki File No. ST-96-77 Page 4 of 8 Proposed Street Map Amendment as it relates purposes of the Comprehensive Plan. follows: (1) To serve as the basis for municipal policy on development and to provide guiding prineiples and objectives for the development of regulations. Staff Comments: The proposed Street Map Amendment will not adversely affect the ability of the City to utilize the Comprehensive Plan for guidance in the establishment of development regulations. (2) To promote the public health, safety, morals, order, convenience, prosperity and the general welfare. Staff Comments: Removal of the right-of-way adjacent to Olympic View Drive would sign (candy impair the City's ability to protect the street from slope failure and development which might affect the slope. The proposed removal from the Oficial Street Map of the proposed right-of-way between Olympic View Drive and 80th Avenue West and the unopened right-of-way lying west of the proposed plat road will not adversely affect the public health, safety, morals, order, convenience, prosperity and general welfare, providing a pedestrianGike access easement between the proposed plat road the the westerety boundary of the proposed plat. (3) To anticipate and influence the orderly and coordinated development of land and building use of the city and its environs, and conserve and restore natural beauty and other natural resources. t Staff' Comments: The proposal appears to be consistent and coordinated with development in the Immediate vicinity if the conditions as recommed are applied. (4) To encourage coordinated development and discourage piecemeal, spot or strip zoning and inharmonious subdividing. Staff Comments: The proposal appears to be coordinated with adjacent development and anticipates the eventual subdividing of the property in a manner that appears to be harmonious with the surrounding development. .(5) To facilitate adequate provisions for public services such as transportation, police and fire protection, water supply, sewage treatment, and parks. Staff f f'Comments: The unopened 184th Street Southwest right-of-way lying east of the conceptual plat can be 'vacated provided a utility easement is retained If the proposal is conditioned as recommended public services should not be adversely affected by this proposal. b) Facts: ECDC Section 15.40 Comprehensive Street Plan states, "The Comprehensive Street Plan shall have the following purposes, In addition to the general purpose of the comprehensive plan: A. To provide for adoption and enforcement of street and thoroughfare maps and coordinated plan including the Official street map to implement the comprehensive plan. B- To facilitate the provision of utilities and transportation. [Ord 3030 § 3, 19951." The following plans have been repealed: Comprehensive thoroughfare plan and the Changes to the plan. A summary of the proposed Street Map Amendment as it relates purposes of the Comprehensive Street Plan follows: ST96-77.DOC / July 3,1996 / Staff Report w� _JO Ln U � La J h-� in w- j LU Ot a# cn Ci S. z E- 1.-o z LULU � a �o Var o P x � h L- O _z u.i us O~ z N, SE Charles Maki File No. ST-96-77 Page 5 of 8 (1) To provide for adoption and enforcement of street and thoroughfare maps and coordinated plan including the official street map to implement the comprehensive plan. Staff Comments: The Street and Thoroughfare plans have been repealed If the conditions as outlined in the recommendations are followed The Official Street Map will continue to provide an effective means of implementing City policy with regard to the development of streets in the vicinity of the proposal. (2) ` To facilitate the provision of utilities and transportation. [Ord. 3030 § 3,1995j. Staff fj`'Comments: Utilities and transportation in the immediate vicinity should not be impaired by the proposal if the conditions as outlined in the recommendations are followed. c) Ems: ECDC Section 18.50 Official Street Map states, "The purpose of this chapter is to: A. Implement the comprehensive street plan. B. Regulate the construction of improvements which could prevent the implementation of the comprehensive street plan." A summary of the proposed Street Map Amendment as it relates purposes of the Official Street Map follows: (1) Implement the comprehensive'street plan. Staff Comments: If the conditions as outlined in the recommendations are followeg the proposal will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan (2) Regulate the construction of improvements which could prevent the implementation of the comprehensive, street plan. Staff Comments: Section 11.Zb above discusses conformance with the Comprehensive Street Plan. It does not appear that the proposal, as conditioned will prevent the implementation of the comprehensive street plan. d)-Conclusions:. (1) The proposal generally appears to be consistent with the purposes of the Comprehensive Plan. However, in order to protect the slopes along Olympic View Drive, the right-of-way adjacent to that street should not be removed from the Official Street Map. Additionally, the unopened Mth Street Southwest right-of- way lying east of the conceptual plat can be vacated, however a utility easement needs to be retained. (2) The proposal generally appears to be consistent with the purposes of the Comprehensive Street Plan. However, it appears that the conditions as recommended in Section I.B of this report are necessary to satisfy the purposes of the Comprehensive Street Plan. (3) The proposal appears to be consistent with the purposes of the Official Street Map, if a pedestrian/bike .access easement between the proposed road and the westerly boundary of the conceptual plat is provided. The applicant has not shown that the proposal will meet the criteria of Street Map Amendment. However, if the conditions as outlined Section B of this report are followed then the proposal will be consistent with the criteria. ST96-77-DOC / July 3,19961 Staff Rood n Charles.Makl File No. ST-96-77 Page 6 of 8 C. Technical Committee 1- Review by City Departments: ¢ Fly a) 'Fist: The Engineering Division had the following recommendations: Approval for = w removal from the Official Street Map the proposed right-of-way between Olympic View m Drive and 80th Avenue West. Approval for the removal from the Official Street Map the w unopened 184th Street Southwest right-of-way lying east of the proposed plat road, v 0 provided that a utility easement is retained. Approval for removal from the Official Street Map the unopened right-of-way lying west of the proposed plat road, provided the Lu = plat road is made public and there is a pedestrian/bike access easement and construction -J �: between the proposed plat road and the westerly boundary of the conceptual plat. Denial w 01 for removal from the Official Street Map the right-of-way adjacent Olympic View Drive (see Attachment 6). J ' b) FMI: The Parks & Recreation Department had the following recommendations: PP p � p lying Approval with exception of the unopened right-of-wayi m west of the conceptual plat w :: unless a pedestrian/bike access easement is provided between the proposed plat road and Z h' the westerly boundary of the conceptual plat (see Attachment 7). z 0' c) lat: The Public Works Department had the following comments and w w. recommendations: A 24-inch water main and a sewer main is located in the right-of-way 2 D, proposed to be removed from the Official Street Map. At a minimum the Public Works U m; Department recommends that a 10-foot wide easement be required for all locations where o _p City utility lines are located (see Attachmeni 8). • + ui ' A Comprehensive Plan (ECDC) oF- z L Compliance with Comprehensive Plan ui cn' U = a) Fd: The subject property is designated as "Single Family Large Lot". z~ bi QncLu ion: The conceptual development is consistent with the existing Comprehensive Plan Land Use designation for the site. c) Facts: The Comprehensive Plan, Residential Development section, identifies goals and policies which relate to "Residential Development" in the City. Specific goals and policies are discussed in detail below. f (1) Section B states as a goal of the City that: "High quality residential development which is appropriate to the diverse lifestyle of Edmonds residents should be v-- maintained and promoted...:' d) Q1 SIWiU: The conceptual development is consistent with the above adopted goals ® and policies of the City for the development of residential property in the City. e) Facts: The Comprehensive Plan, Soils and Topography section, identifies goals and polices which are related to this conceptual development. Specific applicable goals and polices are discussed in detail below. (1) Section C states as a goal of the City that: "Development on steep slopes or hazardous soil conditions should preserve the natural features of the site, in accordance with the following policies: (i) C.l.a. Grading, filling and tree cutting shall be restricted to building pads, driveways, access ways and other impervious surfaces. ST96-77.DQC / July 3,1996 /Staff Report 0 ®, Charles Maki File No. ST-96.77 Page 7 of 8 (ii) C.i.b. Grading shalLnot jeopardize the stability of any j slope of an adjacent property." (iii) C.I.C. Only minimal amounts of cut and fill on hillsides exceeding 15 % slope should be permitted so that the natural topography can be preserved. Fill shall not be used to create a yard on steeply sloped property." f) Cone_ ludo: The proposed Street Map Amendment is consistent with the above adopted goals and policies of the City providing the recommendations at outlined in Section B of this report are followed. ICI. RECONSIDERATIONS AND APPEALS 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 further procedural information, A. Request for Reconsideration Section 20.100.010.E 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 t 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. B. Appeals 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 the project and the date of the decision, the name of the individual or group appealing the decision, their interest in the matter, 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. IV. LAPSE OF APPROVAL Section 20.05.020.0 states 'Unless the owner obtains a building permit, or if no building, is required, substantially commences the use allowed within one year from the date of approval, the conditional use permit shall expire and be null and void, unless the owner files an application for an extension of the time before the expiration date.' V. NOTICE TO COUNTY ASSESSOR The property owner may as a result of the decision rendered by the Hearing Examiner request a change in the valuation of the property by the Snohomish County Assessors Office. ST96.77.DOC /July 3.1996 / Staff Report ST9&77.DOC1July 3, 1995/Staff Roport LL < D LU z 1_0 z E- LLJ U3 L) (n UJ Ul :r L) LL 0 z UJ cr of z EW r 0 city of aonds land use application 0 ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD 0 COMP -PLAN AMENDMENT 13 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 0 HOME OCCUPATION 13 FORMAL SUBDIVISION 0 -SHORT SUBDIVISION 0 LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT 0 PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOP ENT 0 STREET nE0DMENT VACATI0N 0 REZONE 0 SHORELINE PERMIT 0 VARIANCE / REASONABLE USE EXCEPTION 0 OTHER C* _F "' ' 1 ZONE FILE # - L2 " &S -/;" DATo-E REC'D BY A_-r10 E -70 RECEIPT# `Z4-5yS_ HEARING D TE HE Q STAFF El PB E3- ADB � cc ACTION TAKEN: 13 APPROVED 0 DENIED 13 APPEALED Applicant av, eL.4, Phone 776 — - Address fZ35- 7Z&.4 P.a,� Prop" Address or Location 770.e%L Z!�,( WA 98OZ4 Property owner I -la,, Z. Phone 177-f*-- 0139 Address 7704- 01VA"PIC-- Y"�4u D'-'v-ed, WA 960,2 Agent " 4 ­3 W. <- Phone 776-- 6-31/7 Address WA Z,(:> Tax Acc # 3 70,6- od> d:)6 Sec. 146 Legal Description Rng. Details of Projector Proposed Us6'z/w '0 k- 9'-- V 40 - 7,� - 4.0 A-7 .4;k-PV ---------------- ---------- 7p 4v /0 / / In The undersigned applicant and his/ her/ its heirs, and assigns, in consideration of the processing of the damages, including reasonable attorney's fees, arising from any action or infraction based in whole or in part uponI application agrees to release, indemnify, defend and hold the City of Edmonds harmless from any and a false, misleading, inaccurate or incomplete information furnished by the applicant, his/ her/ its employees. agents or The undersigned applicant grants his/ its permission for public officials and the staff of tho' enter the subject property for the purpose of inspection and posting attendant to th' SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT! OWNER/ AGENT L01 ATTACHMENT 1 File No. ST-96-77 Purpose of Checklist. The State Environmental 'Policy Act (SEPA), chapter 43.21C RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An environmental impact statement (EIS) must be prepared_ for all proposals with probable. significant adverse impacts on .the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid .impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an .EIS is required. Instructions for Applicants This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly, with the most precise information known, or give the .best description you can. You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the .need to hire experts. If you reaIly do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not know" or does not apply". complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can assist you. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. Use of checklist for nonproject proposals Complete this checklist for nonproject proposals, even though questions may be answered "does not apply." IN ADDITION, complete the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (part D). For nonproject actions, the references in the checklist to the words "project.' "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposer," and "affected geographic area," respectively. A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: t/11A 2.. Name of applicant: . 3.• Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: 4. ' Date checklist prepared: ATTACHMENT 2 CWCLTl1421A1MASTER Pogo 1 ar22 File No. ST-96-77 t ` 0 U} u U) LU L11 = J F- tn LL.I t O J to Z LL LU �s z F- ro Uj u1 �d U to o�- h _ z W to US O� z S. Agency requesting checklist. City of Edmonds. G'� 7. 1 Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Ph." .Lavr�.evcrfrrsu.'T t�le.,a.a.e...T� 5f.�.e.47t' l�tr�G..,�-�4e•H� J=lt.a�.e. � F'.�� (STAFF COMMENTS) Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? Byes, explain. (STAFF COMMENTS) 8. List any environmental information you know About that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. (STAFF COMMENTS) 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? Uyes, explain. Alo (STAFF COMMENTS) 14. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. rr o sa.,e �c.c,.o-o1rY. o (STAFF COMMENTS) Page 2 of 22 CHMTi10.2-4- .MASM 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. r�gcle.S�tS we.a-c(e� e�v-'•�`"1-L¢. Y+a-c-2'f�Qvi ot� y�,��hu�'u�%.von-� zrW. 7.1.5 y«-c.4•.'7'Yacz rfJ�''SOC�S� (STAFF COMMENTS) 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise Iocation of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide range or boundaries df the site(s). Provide legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you Are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. o r-/•t�i 6 y o +�-Az,— ei/E J` e c /f3 Y % �tf %'C 4 � kV. M i u r 14 ,.Ds-'y (STAFF COMMENTS)_ TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANTo� 1 r!o-r ,-� o rs, %b Pl-c a sRl B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS c!, 1. Earth a. General deseription.of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other: t/`i Orl _.z (STAFF COMMENTS) b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? i^-? go o,/-/ (STAFF COMMENTS) C. What general types of soils are found an the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. Para 3 of 22 CWLTno as.vs.MASM d. � VT UJ z f— e. t— 0: w LU a— W w� =Ui' t1 O; — z' di Al U; o ~ f. z [Z�7 s•1T-G �s Gav�Av�SaCJ ��" l�rlrrraac�y �-il�Gr�^WO�-.�YeY-�,1� rsfgS�g1LY -r•p et bvt 9 5' Lam_—'�'O a vG� u i 510 wt tS er h G. rt w v (STAFF COMMENTS) Are there surface indicafions or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. �cln (STAFF COMMMS) Describe the purpose, type and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fills {STAFF COMMENT Could erosion occur as -a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. (STAFF COMMENTS) g. About what percent of the site will• be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? !v 'S 2 -/ (STAFF COMMENTS) Page 4 of 22 C1iKLTlt41f.4J.NAST6R t® ., } •- 011 h. measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: Proposed (STAFF COMMENTS) 2. AIR a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. L�i����L6-may,'© Jin S 4FpJ G.G4LTr+P GGt/t /!- / S 34 �2.a.tl 11� H�iy�/ zz k+'il -? D S.o d-S S O G7 fee 7� us a i`Tti r-G. f �¢ ! %r�_s twiC.a.r.. • jD s-a� is <c-K.,�o 4,�`�.c% GAFF CMMENTS) b. Are there any off -site sources of missions or odor that may effect your proposal? If so, generally describe. � a (STAFF COMMENTS). C. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to the, if any: (STAFF COMMENTS) 3. WATER a. Surface: (1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)?' If yes, describe type and provide names. 7f appropriate, state what streaam or river it flows into. a- r,-to as Aol- . 4Y�-� :a.., �q pZJta• yG,tZ, L+ Q Y' s+ e.w 9' a'% i'LeY /Gf �? O M w/ n' -4 / K� � SYTAEF COMMENTS) . 4 pare S of 12 CMCLT/104:5-91.MASM �! U p V w (3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface w water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill U) LL material. Al/al� Q� CC Q a _ u, z (STAFF COMMENTS) Z o L, u,, p (4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, t� ur purpose; and approximate quantities if known. s v_� - 0{ Z: V U) Q (STAFF COMMENTS) z (5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year fioodplain? if so, note location on•the Fite plan. {STAFF COMMENTS) (6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describo the type //of waste and anticipated voludie of discharge. b® (STAFF COMMENTS) Psgs 6 of 22 CM21104MMAS7 A M CIQCLT/10 2S9Dd1A578R i b. Ground: (1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water. be.discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. 1a (STAFF COMMENTS) (2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any. (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals..,; agricultural; eta). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the systems) are expected to serve. za rtn (STAFF COMMENTS) c. Water Runoff (including storm water): (1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known), Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other -waters? If so,, describe. j (4 r�a►r..�.s-e7.fLL�` A�//�7 r-2 l-a-ear./s le— rz /u r o O I y for ja r G. ! cw .G7.- c . (STAFF COMMENTS) (2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. (STAFF COMi1iENTS) Pape 7 of22 - --_ "'.......�.. ..� '� '.....__� ... �...... r...........��, f' a UHULL WU101 11BiJUB.A, It UUy3 Y'Dlr' C. J �� LRS Q.YL.7 Gct^P.iL- i(J {STAFF COM1Yfi:NTS? W(I LU U 0 4. Plants to LU w H a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: wLL 0. deciduous tree- alder, maple, aspen, other: M � ✓ evergreen tree: 9r, cedar; pine, other: _. gng Q ✓ shrubs a . 'grass zw: z hz-pasture Z F- crop or grain ww o, wet soil .plants: cattail, buttercup, bulrush, skunk cabbage, .other: 0 —water plants: avaterlily, eelgrass, milfoil, other: oW. H . .other types of vegetation: "_- Z; (STAFF COi ZWNTS) { z I z b. What kind and amount off vegetation Nvill be removed or altered? A 7-_ .. (STAFF COMMENTS) . 0 C. List threatened or endangered species/ known -to be on or near the site. c® (STAFF COMMENTS d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other materials to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: . Page 8 of 22 CHItLT/!0O-MMASM Lti (STAFF COMMENTS) .5. Animals a. Check or circle 'any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: birds: huavlC., heron, eagle, sa hirds other: — mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other - fish: buss, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: (STAFF COMMENTS) b. List.uny threatened or endangered species -known to be on or near the site. (STAFF COMMENTS) C. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. (STAFF COM[AfENTS) 0 d. Pro/posed measures to preserve or enbance/wildlife, _iif any: Ti i® (STAFF COMMENTS) 6. Energy and Natural Resources • Page 9 o�S2 . CWMTna?b4). AAS FJt 0 r-i .. ... ®:.�"' •�V ...''N a��i�T 5"Lid ,'tii�'7t�� a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stave, solar) will be used to meet the completed projecVs energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. _I�t �.d efo✓• �.�.e�'f�r n � i n c7r ei .�us..� .✓/_.� e U O. (STAFF COMMENTS) W cn u_ b. Would your project 'affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally w describe. 0 ci! a Alo LL D1cn a, h T Z_ F' H 0 Z w Lu'. D' (STAFF COMMENTS) U cn' n ri LU w�; S U, c. What kinds of energy conservation features are -included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control eS/nergy impacts, if any: LL 0; /uD.� fG.%'L^o'tts-mac. .dL�� f 'mot �' /7•'y1 �C. di to U = - O N Z 0 E� (STAFF COMMENTS) 7. Environmental Heulth a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a' result of this proposal? If so describe. �a (STAFF COMMENTS) page 10of22 cwarnau.sa.r�,urex �.. (1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. �L11 a'�ic.:2 (STAFF COMMENTS) (2) Proposed reasures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: (STAFF COMMENTS) I , b. Noise (1) What types. of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic; equipment, operation, other)? (STAFF COMMENTS) (2) What types and levels pf noise would be created by dr associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from .the site. o vra 7�s-cc.c 7` a-va� o l cctr!% �C e G,.,► dl ant t9 u / 7 Q, d�a.i.7t7-�HrC.G.. bc.Orr �... la a ✓�$ • � cs-r ✓.e 0 $4A.tPa vs� s ly ws 6rL�rt.l�ces- . (S AFF COMMENTS) ! (3) Proposed measures to/reduce or/control noise impacts, if any: • _ CL H tS U•1-6LI' / y /y�) 4.3J C u-R (STAFF COMMENTS) Pala ll of22 CWU.T/JO•Z'FSU.:{ASCER +I . ......... .. 8. Land and Shoreline Use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? �12L'_O.LtJ7"' flY"Ofs,.4':"/[/ XG2.07 7'i7✓ � C9-C.l:I LL'C:b'J�. Y"al'J'r /G�� = Z 19u�7y» r�GY�G ,p v 7`iO l7 O /LI C -w; r ¢ .0 cs: (STAFF COMMENTS) �Q ;n a. - ;n wl I tx- b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. to u. w O 1tl o • �Q LL wt t—. x z_ t-- (STAFF' COMMENTS) o; z ww of C. Describe any structures on the site. o cm, ww x v; w Z! - ui N' v =. (STAFF COMMENTS) o� z d. Will any structures be demolished? It so, what? S ' )STAFF COMMENTS) e. What is the current zoning classification of the site?. E® (STAFF COMMENTS) Page 12 ot22 f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? wt (STAFF COMMENTS) J V.. a, g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master plan designation of the site?. Lu W.1%A ua = —J H; to u (STAFF COMMENTS) . Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. T (STAFF COMMENTS) i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? (STAFF COMMENTS) j. Approximately hnwmany people would the completed project displace? (STAFF COMMENTS) Papa 13 of 22 c MU0.lgs.Mnsrsa t. 0 Cn u En W' W JH! (n U. d{ W LL Qt D a# _, z� �- o �o v � o H L. u- p _z Lu th U S O~ z 110 — -- — -.—�•.+»• v .a, j.• vtawwa a,, --t ...... na1.,i cxmu"g ano projected land uses and plans, if any: P�.tts•c 7iT ¢, PIP—D pvodrZsiu� (STAFF COMMENTS) 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. f %-ro r i�ti a. � C„ �" � per o JC ! 2 �ot r�t a arse..% f�„c �r,� ,�,• a rA �roA.srSw! (STAFF COMMENTS) b. Approximately how many units, if any would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low- incoome housing. /em�11: — r %e- r2' (STAFF COMMENTS) C. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing implicts, if any: /// (STAFF COtuaNTs) fte 14 of 22 cwaYnasva.a'nsrEx i G a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principle exteHor jbuilding material(s) proposed? 1 (STAFF CoM)1'.1EiYTs) b. What views in: the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? (STAFF COMMENTS) C. Proposed measures.to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: (STAFF CoAimws) Il. Light and Glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? m- (STAFF COMMENTS) b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? cEactYaa2s.9o.Mnsr¢e 0 N'( (STAFF COMMENTS) Faye 15of22 Y -31 (STAFF COMirmS) 2&' 0, r zh 0 12. Recreation .0 w 2 a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? obi -A .,14tJ LU LU M A1*1IC-V F- �L- 0 6i C1): L) (STAFF COMMENTS) 0 z b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreation uses" If so describe (STAFF COMMENTS) C. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or upplicant, it any: -rl YT/: g. (STAFF COMMENTS) Page 16 of 22 CMT/10-+1-97.A4Asn;jt ® 13. Historic and Cultural Preservation a. Are there any places or• objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? ' If so, generally describe. j �i 4, P --- i (STAFF COMMENTS) )( b. Generally describe an landmarks br evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or' cultural importance known to be on or next to the site, u C . L' (STAFF COMMENTS) to C. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: (STAFF,COAIMENTS) 14. Transportation a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. 0- 7,i b. CIMMA0.7S9].MAMR (STAFF COMMENTS) Is site currently served by public transit? If no, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit Stop? of f/ ' �rytryrwt�,lf�, /vu.9s,V+ lY..a»� res-tci I-r / a{Zs-o ,a.rldLCCL�cG, e.� n.+ c7, !, Pap 17 of 22 L® (STAFF COWENTS) C. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? CJ �/ CIO (STAFF COMP TENTS) d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether/pub/liic or private). H G.Lt � CL¢. —.S c2.G H O G�-Ot` + -� p.r^/-�Nra..c r7 . 7-41 - — + (STAFF ComfENTS) e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, gene,rafny dese ibe. 1Vo (STAFF COMMENTS) f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes ,wGLoruelrdG.�occur. 4.-7/ -7V/. _t/ 6__/ GC CWLT110-25.93.MASM c (STAFF COMMENTS) PAS* 38 ot22 S• rraposectmeasures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any.: (STAFF COMMENTS) 15. Public Services a. Would .the project result in an increased need .for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? Ifso, genergily describe. /.Z O r sr ds�i� (STAFF COMMENTS) b. Proposed measures .t.o[reduce -or control direct impacts on public services, if any - (STAFF COMMENTS) 16. Utilities a. Cir+ �s currently available at the site electricity, aturai g water efuse service telephon sanitary sewer Deptic system, other: (STAFF COMMENTS) Faye 19 of 22 Paye 20 of 22 CWCL7ttMP" MASH A v5 LU -J (n LLI us 01� j� LL Dj cA O i{ {- _ z E— t— a z ww 5 :D: cl1 U tn, olu ~1 H H LL_0 z W to O~ z ` I 1' • D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJ'ECT ACTIONS Y (do not use this sheet for project actions) Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the list of the elements of the environment. When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the types of activities likely to result from the . proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms. 1. How would the proposal be,likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air, production, storage, or release of to-xic or hazardous substances; or production of noise? /V /d h' 4 c• a u, b.L/ d�vt esr.4 5Tp y-vy. i^rtissK H�,L a.<a- -e vvfl rsze-2c6� Proposal measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: 2. How would the proposal he'likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life? f Proposed measures to protect or ,conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: Ale /A 3. How would the proposal he likely to deplete energy or natural resources? !V 1 Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: !v C1sa.Tna41.0.MA$M Pogo 21 of22 zc„a,uya areas or areas aesignated (or eugible or under study) for governmental protection, such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habit�a•t,, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, noodplains, or prime farmlands? Z S Zj H W cc w � ' p Proposed measures to protect such resources or to Avoid or reduce impacts are: En I F- (n U. W —'' S. How would the proposal be likelyto affect land and shoreline use, e, including whether it would allow ar encourage tared " <' or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? to LU,. x z f- �_00 z W W O —j wW�+, Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: uL_ p zi U Uy H F�z 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation .or'public services and utilities? Al. ... e: Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such.demand(s) are: V 9. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. N t ts9 --- pogo 22 ot22 CMTIIO. 3.MAsrsa ,n Y . MY OF EDMONDS 250 S M AVENUE NORM, EDMONDS, WA 98020 (206) 771-0220 RCW 197-11-970 Determination of Nousignificance (DNS) DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE Description of proposal: Amend the City,s official street map to remove .that portion of proposed 60-foot wide right-of-way designation between Olympic View Drive and 80th Avenue West starting just north of 184th Street Southwest. Also the designation of the existing 20-foot wide right-of-way of 184tb Street Southwest starting at Olympic View Drive and proceeding west approximately 253 feet shall be removed; and remove the designation of a portion of the unused right-of-way, to allow a vacation of the subject right's -of -way pursuant to an application submitted under City of Edmonds Planning Division File No. ST-96-78 (see File No. ST-96-77). Proponent: Charles Makie Location of proposal, including street address if any: 250 Sth Avenue North Lead agency: CITY OF EDMONDS The lead agency for this proposal has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement is not required under RCW 43.21.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental .checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. There is no comment period for this DNS. X This DNS is issued under 197-11 340(2); the lead agency will not act on this proposal for 15 days from the date below. Comments must be submitted by July 15, 1996. Responsible Official: Seffrev�, ,. Wilson Position/Title: Current Planning Supervisor, Department of Community Services - Planning Divisio n Phone: 771-0220 Address: City of Edmonds, 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds, WA 98020 Date: G Signature =,. XX You may appeal this .determination to Robert Chave, Planning Manager, at 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds, WA 98020, no later than JJjy 15, 1996, by filing a •written appeal citing the reasons. You should be prepared to make specific factual objections. Contact Jeffrey S. Wilson to read or ask about the procedures for SEPA appeals. XX Posted on June 28. 1996, at the Edmonds Public Library, Edmonds Community Services Building, and the Edmonds Post Office. XX Distribute to "Checked" Agencies on the reverse side of this form., along with a copy of the Checklist. Nse 1 oft ATTACHMENT 3 tYJQ-WDY/(DATW.s9PA File No. ST-96-77 0 } Vicinity Map ATTACHMENT 4 File No. ST-96-77 } w H a1 D = d. }... w z H J.- O. F: LLu W p- h =v hr I.L p z Lu to V = Qh z t .....,.. SEAVIEW PARK Jill ..- .... '.' ti0th AVENtlE N. — —...— — — —._ — — ------------- ( _ _ -114—--i----i------""t_ Mtn PLncE_ttrn as ?\ Vi m i i to S .� A rn �. J, r ► r L — _--- TOW Aw+ue w. m 'i —I -4 i En fn �..J 436 a ----'--D'`1 i f o 9g ar I m x -----------�to —7ett �wtuEiv--- — r _ -, � /r-------------; - `- _ :'r' ;Q � N '� 0 1 PLANNED RESIDEN'RAL COMMUNITY OWNER — DR. HANN PARK OLYMPIC NEW DRIVE EDMONOS, WASHINGTON PRELIMINARY SITE for OFFICIAL STREET AMENDMEtIT ATTACHMENT 5 File No. ST-96-77 „ t , I za MEMORANDUM 3 f t,9 vivo 'Date: June 3, 1996 To: Planning Division From: Gordy Hyde, Engineering Coordinator Subject: Stree harles Maki (ZZ0 LQIY_plpic View Dr 1 (ST-96-77) The application has been reviewed by the Engineering Division. The application should be revised to reflect three requested actions (1) vacation of Olympic View Drive right-of-way, (2) revision of the street map to -remove the proposed right-of- way connecting OVD to 80th Ave. W., and (3) vacation of 184th -St. S.W. right-of- way. The Division has the following require.ments/recommendations.r6garding this proposal: * The right-of-way adjacent to Olympic View Drive should, not be vacated, as it is needed for slope protection above the roadway.' An -alternative would - be to vacate the wider right -of -Way and provide a twenty .to forty foot wide slope easement. e The proppsed right-of-way between OVD and 80th Ave. W. can be removed. *The unopened 184th St. S.W. right-of-way lying east of the proposed plat road can be vacated provided a utility easement is retained. The unopened right-of-way lying west of the proposed plat road can be vacated, provided the Plat road is made puiblic AMd there is a pediastdan/bike access easement and construction between the proposed plat road and'the westerly boundary of the proposed plat. The application is not considered complete until these issues are clarified. Perhaps the applicant should make two applications, one for vacation and one for street map amendment. CITY OF EDMONDS ST96077.DOC INGINERRiNG DIVISION ATTACHMENT 6 File No. ST-96-77 0 OC APPLICATION ROUTING FORM FILE: ST-96-77 AND CHECKLIST FROM: PLANNING r'>. ROUTED T0: Engineering - Fire Pubic Works_513 Staff Comments: �,—M *Additional Infoation Required for Complete Application cation *Additional Studies Required to Complete Review • Owner RETURNED w� . un Engineering „ Fire Public Works ' Q, Parks 8T Rec. J Property Address�704 Of YMPIG VIEW DRti/ Date of Application a130/96 Type_ OFFICIAL STREET MAP AMEI�D�ENT Hearing Requ€red:Yes__x-__-_. No Date of Hearing (€f known) X Application —A—Fee _x APO List . Title Report* X Vicinity Map Elevations Petition (Official Street Map) Critical Areas Determination OTHER COMMENTS Site Plan for Short Subdivision (8.5 x 11) Site Plan (11 x 17) Logals (E)isting & Proposed) -Environmental Assessment Proof of 2-Year Occupancy (ADU) Declarations (Variance & C. U. P.) Environmental Checklist ATTACHMENT 7 File No. ST-96-77. APP L I C ATION ROUTING FORM FILE: ST-96-77 antn CHECKLIST FROM: PLANNINt 7LrIF91 RETURNED En$ineerin ;� ;<1:1Y i991r Fire Public Works Parks $t Rec. • ',NNN.� T.: _.:.:u.no - �. .--...• • _. -aA-,A1M1 j-T- J,ppas t tom* —V: k s,r� i/��1.'�CISi�3�.`:�1'•�Its�.['et:��.�a•w>•�.rest—ssr-i .�c.r>.r�wc-r:i=. *Addifional StudiesRequired to Complete • Owner -CHARLES MAKI 4 Property Address 7704 OLYMFIC VIEW QRIVE Date of Application 5/30/96 Type .OFFICIAL STREET MAP AMENDMENT Hearing Required:Yes._.X No Date of Hearing (if known) X Application X Fee X APO Ust Title Report X Vicinity Map Elevations Petition (Official Street Map) Critical Areas Determination OTHER COMMENTS Site Plait for Short Subdivision (8.5 x 11) Site Plan (11 x 17) Legals (Existing & Proposed) Environmental Assessment Proof of 2-Year Occupancy (ADU) Declarations (Variance & C. U. P.) Environmental Checklist ATTACHMENT 8 File No. ST-96-77 t 0 A. Introduction 1: Applicant: Charles Maki 2. Case No. ST'96-77 ST 96-7g 3. Location: 7704 Olympic View Drive 4. Application: as outlined in the official agenda 5. Amended application: Address the recommendations of the Hearing Examiner and the neighborhood concerns. 6. Major issues: a. Remove from the Official Street Map the proposed 60 foot right-of-way between Olympic View Drive and 80th Avenue West. (colored yellow on the attached map) b. Remove from the Official Street Map and vacate .the unopened 184th Street Southwest 20 foot right-of-way lying east of the proposed plat road, provided that a utility easement is retained, ( colored light blue) ` a a right-of-way be retained by the City on the unopened extension of the 184th Street Southwest right-of-way lyingwest of the proposed plat road. When the Property way shall be widened and relocated ated toaccommodatea street extension ttot-of 80th Avenue West from the future plat road, currently on the south of Lot 11. ( colored red) t0 d. Removal from the Official Street Map the and vacate the right-of-way adjacent to Olympic View Drive. The City would be granted an easement for bank erosion control for the same property plus a 20 foot strip adjacent to Olympic View Drive from the above strip south to the south boundary of the property. (colored orange) e. Approval of the items be transferable. B. Reasons and Logic for Approval �' D d W 1. The reason to approve (a.) is that it is being replaced with the z proposed plat road (outlined in green), plus a connection to a proposed street on the west boundary that will meet the street standards now in force. W W 2 =)! v n.. 0 -- 2. The reason to approve (b.) is that it is being replaced with the o W; proposed plat road that will be far easier and less expensive to build, considering the topography of the property. The city will be giving a 20foot W z right-of-way and gaining a 30 foot or 40 foot completed street. w cn 3. The original application asked for a removal of the right-of-way z described in (c.). However, to accommodate the concerns and the request of the neighbors, the applicant will accept the Hearing Examiners recommendations. —`� 4. The engineering department of the City has agreed that the City ._, does not need the property (d.)and would only use it for bank erosion control. The property owner will grant an easement to the City for erosion control on the property described in the application and further will grant to the City an a easement for erosion control for a 20 foot strip adjacent to Olympic View Drive from the above 'strip south to the south boundary that borders Olympic View Drive. M C. Advantages to the City 1. The City would gain a completed street from Olympic View Drive to the west property line of Lot 10 that borders Lot 11 and 12. � a; 2. The owners of Lot 11 and 12 could negotiate the placement of the �' street that continues from Lot 10 to 80 Avenue West. The City of Edmonds w U. ( owns Lot 12. a a� 3. The City would have erosion control authority for the entire hi gh a#' bank adjacent to Olympic View Drive. = W .; r= r o, 4. The City would have a net gain in property right-of-way and a net W W gain in erosion control �o o o ~ 5. The City would give up approx. 9,400 sq. ft. and gain approx. 18,275 sq. & for a net gain of 8,875 sq.ft. ham-• U' z 6. Lots 11, 12, and 13 could be developed with a connecting street. Ui �. ~ D. Advantages to the neighborhood Z 1. The right-of-way between Olympic View Drive and 80th Avenue West would be preserved. 2. If Lot 11, Lot 12, and Lot 13 were to be developed, a street would be completed between Olympic View Drive and 80th Avenue West. E. Advantages to the owners of 7704 Olympic View Drive 1. A street can be constructed to best utilize the property with its severe topographical problems that replaces 184th Street. r a 2. Restore the logical gz property lines along Olympic View Drive. 3. Provide for neighborhood agreement. �,...--____._-----I - - - -----_---.-- --- t I'"W S. I% ! I — t0 4 9 Is• i S E A Vi E�YI F t R -'----------- TWOODSCREEK I PLACE '—"'—'----ram'—j I f 6 T R A C T 9 9 9 I 3---------- ---^ . ii ADMIRALTY ACRES D L 0 C K 2 — 12 , -. .,I.— — — — — — -- — — — — — — — — — — l` IDOEI GLEN i. 1: elI0% 1 lotl la \106NN yy is EOMONOIp SEAM k1 EI'T I - ---------- Attachment A Y r Wt W J U UO to a w .wJ 1— r to LLI w}, tr- ; 7 Cn I; Zw Z H 1— Q 2 w LU �a U V) Q E = U� i. - f- L- O. Z. tli rn CJ _ O Z to Ord.3113 (G) ORDINANCE NO. 3113 AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 3110, SECTION 2, TO LIMIT co"ncil pensa- pe THE INCREASE IN COMPENSATION TO MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL lion ELECTED ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 2000 (H) ORDINANCE NO. 3114 AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 3054 TO CORRECT A LEGAL R DESCRIPTION FOR THE FOREST GLEN ANNEXATION AREA Ord.3115 (I} ORDINANCE NO. 3115 AMENDING THE CITY'S OFFICIAL STREET MAP TO Amend DELETE PLAN LINED RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR 88TH AVENUE WEST SHOWN AS Street Map FileST-96-72 APPROXIMATELY 60 FEET IN WIDTH ON THE EXISTING OFFICIAL STREET MAP BETWEEN 218TH STREET W AND 220TH STREET SW, AND APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW REGARDING A HEARING HELD ON AUGUST 20,1996 ON THIS MATTER. (Applicant: Richard and Nancy Hale / File No. ST-96-72) Findings of (J) APPROVAL OF CONSOLIDATED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Fact I File ST-96-77 & PERTAINING TO CONCURRENT APPLICATIONS TO AMEND THE CITY'S T-96- ST-96-78 OFFICIAL STREET MAP (FILE NO. ST-96-77) AND VACATE CERTAIN PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY IN THE VICINITY OF OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE AND 184TH STREET SOUTHWEST (FILE NO. ST-96-78). THE SUBJECT PROPERTY INVOLVED INCLUDE: 7704 OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE, 18325 80TH AVENUE .� WEST, AND 18408 79TH PLACE WEST. (Applicant: Charles Maki / File Nos." ST- 47;stnd ST-96-78) aids -Roof 7 () REPORT ON BIDS OPENED SEPTEMBER 3 1996 FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF Replacement THE ROOF REPLACEMENT OF THE EDMONDS LIBRARY, EDMONDS MUSEUM AND NEW CITY HALL BUILDING, AND AWARD OF CONTRACT TO T.B.W.P. GENERAL CONTRACTORS ($25,263.25 INCLUDING SALES TAX) Library plaza (L) REPORT ON FINAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS FOR THE LIBRARY PLAZA PLANTER Planter Project REHABILITATION PROJECT AND COUNCIL ACCEPTANCE OF PROJECT Surpins ' (M) DECLARING UNIT 87, A 1978 FORD DUMP TRUCK ASSIGNED TO THE Dump Truck WATER/SEWER SECTION, SURPLUS AND AUTHORIZATION TO SELL AT THE JAMES MURPHY AUCTION COMPANY COUNCIL PRESIDENT EARLING MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MYERS, FOR APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS B AND F. MOTION CARRIED, COUNCILMEMBER PETRUZZI ABSTAINED. Items approved are as follows: Minutess (B) APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 16,1996 (I) ORDINANCE NO.3112 ESTABLISHING NEW ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES FOR Ord.3112 THE PROCESSING OF PROJECT PERMIT APPLICATIONS AS REQUIRED BY THE Regulatory Reform REGULATORY REFORM ACT, CHAPTER 36.70B RCW, INCLUDING NOTICE AND TIMELINE REQUIREMENTS, CONSOLIDATED PERMIT PROCESSING AND AMENDED JUDICIAL APPEAL PROCEDURES RosignaGon 2a. RESIGNATION OF POLICE CHIEF TOM MILLER of Police C1,1ef Mayor Fahey announced that Chief Miller presented his resignation, and reasons for his decision, to her on Monday at 5:00 p.m. After thorough discussions with Chief Miller, she regrettably accepted his resignation. The Council was advised shortly before the Council meeting began. City Council Approved Minutes September 24,1996 Page 2 t EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL .APPROVED MINUTES SEPTEMBER 24,1996 The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:02 p.m. by Mayor Barbara Fahey in the Library PIaza Room, 650 Main Street, followed by the flag salute. Barbara Fahey, Mayor Dave Earling, Council President Tom Petruzzi, Councilmember John Nordquist, Councilmember Roger L. Myers, Councilmember Jim White, Councilmember Dick Van HoIlebeke, Councilmember Gary Haakenson, Councilmember Michael Springer, Fire Chief Tom Miller, Police Chief Paul Mar, Community Services Director Arvilla Ohlde, Parks and Recreation Manager Art Housler, Administrative Services Director Jeff Wilson, Current Planning Supervisor Noel Miller, Public Works Superintendent James Walker, City Engineer Scott Snyder, City Attorney Sandy Chase, City Clerk Jeannie Dines, Recorder 1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA item added Mayor Fahey requested discussion of a personnel matter be added to the agenda as Item 2a. to Agenda COUNCILMEMBER MYERS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER VAN HOLLEBEKE, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS AMENDED. MOTION CARRIED, 2. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS Councilmember Petruzzi pulled Items B and F from the Consent Agenda in order for him to abstain from the vote on those items. COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCMMEMBER VAN HOLLEBEKE, FOR PASSAGE OF THE REMAINDER OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED. Items passed are as follows: (A) ROLL CALL Claim (C) APPROVAL OF CLAIM WARRANTS #12191 THRU #12608 FOR THE WEEK OF Kamints SEPTEMBER 16, 1996 IN THE AMOUNT OF $119,572.81; AND APPROVAL OF PAYROLL WARRANTS #12551 THRU #12788 FOR THE PERIOD OF SEPTEMBER 1 THRU SEPTEMBER 15,1996 IN THE AMOUNT OF $470,739.44 claim for (D) ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FROM WILLIAM VANCE Damages SPANGLER ($266.70) Genemi (E) REPORT ON GENERAL FUND FINANCIAL POSITION FOR THE PERIOD ENDING Fond AUGUST 31,1996 City Council Approved Minutes September 24, 1996 Page 1 z z= _LU m. JO 'a :n LU LLI LO LUO' w} LL_ Lna =LU F- _ z� �-0 LULU 0 0 o— �- LULU F-� LLC _z vv o� z KPI 0 Item #: EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL Agenda Memo Originator: Planning Division For Action: X For Information: Subject: APPROVAL OF CONSOLIDATED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW PERTAINING TO CONCURRENT APPLICATIONS TO AMEND THE CITY'S OFFICIAL STREET MAP (FILE NO. ST-96-77) AND VACATE CERTAIN PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY IN THE VICINITY OF OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE AND 18TH STREET SOUTHWEST (FILE NO. ST-96-78). THE SUBJECT PROPERTY INVOLVED INCLUDE: 7704 OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE, 18325 80TH AVENUE WEST AND 18408 79TH PLACE WEST. (APPLICANT: CHARLES MAKI / FILE NOS. ST-96-77 & ST-96-78) Agenda Time: Consent Agenda Date: September 24,1996 Exhibits Attached: 1. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law 2. Draft Council Minutes for 9/3/96 Clearances: Department/Initials Admin Svcs/Finance Community Svcs City Attorney Engineering City Clerk Parks & Rec Court Plannin� Personnel Public Works Fire Treatment Plant Police City Council Mayor Reviewed by Council Finance Committee: Community Services Public Safety Approved for Consent Agenda: Recommend Review by Full Council. Expenditure Amount Appropriation _Required: $ 0 Budgeted: $ 0 Required: $ 0 Funding Source: Not applicable. Previous Council Action: On September 3, 1996, the Council held a consolidated public hearing on two requests by the applicant for an amendment to the City Official Street Map and to vacate existing dedicated public right-of-way. After consideration of both requests, the Council approved the applications subject to certain conditions (see Exhibit 2). Narrative: The applicant submitted two application requests for consideration by the Council. The first of which was to amend the City's Official Street Map to remove planned -line rights -of -way in the vicinity of Olympic View Drive and 184th Street Southwest and to remove portions of the existing dedicated rights -of -way on Olympic View Drive and 184th Street Southwest from the Official Street Map in order to allow for the vacation of said right-of-way. The second request considered by the Council was the request by the applicant to vacate said portions of the 184th Street Southwest and Olympic View Drive rights -of -way. Recommended Action: Adopt the proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and direct the City Attorney to prepare the necessary. Ordinances to implement the approved changes to the Official Street Map as part of the next round of the Comprehensive Plan update (see Exhibit 1). Council Action: ' UGrliarpg r 07 VAX 208 { T 0225 MEN MtrRPHY WALLACE z BEFORE THE EDMONDS MY COUNCIL Q LU - 2 Consolidated Hearing Application of Charles Maki to vacate unused right-of-way lying west of Olympic View Drive north of 184th Streett, L) o to amend the official street map to remove plan lined lights -Of -way of 184th Street S.W. 253 feet of right.of-way of IS4th Street CD -1 � S.W., to vacate Public right -Of -way between Qlymplc View Drive and 76th Avenue W, and an approximately YO to 20-foot wide portion of the public right + (n o i on the west side of Olympic View Drive north of 184th Street. UJ tLLL � `n File No.: ST 96.77r J SrT.nC g 96-78 031 X LU tprrCrr►�v z z o This matter came on for a consolidated hearing before the Edmonds City Council on September 3, 1996. Applications to amend the City's i, j official street map to .remove 60-foot tight -of --way between Olympic View Drive and 8Qth Avenue W. commencing just north of 284th Street S.W., to vacate an unopened o cn o �. portion of a 20-foot wide public right -of= -way line between Olympic View Drive and approximately 176th Avenue W. and to vacate approxirnatety 10 to 20-foot-wide portion of the public right-of�way _ c"'a�; located on the west side of Olympic View Ia0 running north approximately 184th Street S.W. for approximately 270 feet were rive LL - z combined with an application to amend the City's official street map to remove Plan lined 60-foot wide right -of- way between Olympic View Drive and 80th Avenue Fui m' r W. starting just north of 184th Street S.W., reduce the plan lined right-of"way for 184th Street S.W. commencing at t32ympic View Drive westerly for approximately 253 feet, and to remove e Olymy � � a plan lnen rights lying west Olympic View Drive and north of 184th Street S.W. All the proposed requests are located either adjacent to or across the fo lowing Property addresses: 7704 Olympic View Drive, 18325 SOth Avenue 'W., and 18408 79th Pl. W. This decision is based upon the record before the Edmonds City Council and the record and recommendation of the City's Hearing Examiner. The recommenda#ions of the Hearing Examiner elated July 26, 1996, are adopted as the Council's findings .. Specifically amended herein. and conclusions except as `� �D.DI'I'IGiNA� TESTIIKON'!� ,4.1ti'�D 1iVF Y�1l�A'i'iON © At the City Council hearing, the staff recommendation was amended and differed from that presented to the Hearing Examiner. The Hearing Examiner in his findings at page 10, recommendation 4, recommends denial of the request to remove from the official street map of the plan lined right-of-way adjacent to Olympic View Drive. Staff recommended a the City Council that, in conjunction with the platting process, the City's interest a ded t providing slope stability could be achieved through the creation of a native growth protection casement for slope ra -Y- fl © h• J U. J Ln O 0. Cnw J F-. �Q LLCJC LL LU d. =w z �- r0 z �- cow U rn o� = LU U rh U-a �z w u; o� z stability rather than a full taking of the property as right-of-way, The purpose for the additional right-of-way was to control vegetation on the slope to enhance stability and that same objective can be achieved through the less intrusive means of a native growth protection easement. In the course of the hearings, the applicant acknowledged his willingness to await final approval of the vacations and street map amendment until such time as development approval for the property located at 7704 Olympic. View Drive, 18325 Both Avenue W. and 18408 79th Pi. W, is finally granted. The exact location of interior struts, connections and other required mitigations cannot be finally ascertained until such approvals are complete. The Edmonds City Council therefore concludes that the purposes and objectives of the Edmonds Community Development Code will be met by: 1. Amendment of the Official Street Map to delete the plan line for 60 feet of right- of-way between Olympic View Drive and 80th Avenue W. in accordance with Exhibit A, Attachment 5, to the Hearing Examiner's recommendation. 2. Amendment of the Official street Map to delete the plan lined extension of 184th Street S.W. lying east of the proposed plat road, retaining any existing utility easement and to maintain future provisions for utilities. See Exbibit A, Attachment S, to the Hearing Examiner's recommendation. 3. deny amendment of the official street map to delete the plan lined extension of 184th St. S.W. lying west of the proposed plat road. In conjunction with the subdivision and development approval for the subject property, that section of right-of-way may be required to be widened and relocated to accommodate a future 184th St. S.W. street extension between the unopened right-of-way south of lot 11 and the future plat road. 4. Approval of the amendment of the official street neap to remove 20 feet of right- of-way adjacent to Olympic View Drive contingent upon: a. Approval of a 2o-foot-wide native growth protection easement along the applicant's frontage along Olympic View Drive, the extent and nature of which will be determined as a part of the platting approval process. b. The provision to the City within 21 calendar days to the date of approval of a legal dcseription for the native growth protection easement. c, The payment of compensation for the vacated property in accordance with the submitted appraisal adjusted in accordance with provisions of state law and City ordinance. -2- Q 003• M ® �. to S. The future application to develop the property owned by the applicant is and shall be subject to all applicable requirements contained in the Edmonds Community Development Code. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to ensure compliance with the various provisions contained in those ordinances. Nothing herein shall be interpreted to prejudge or limit the discretion of the City Council in reviewing such application(s) to finally determine the placement and appropriate route of interior roads and utilities and to mitigate the impacts, if any, from the development. In order to provide for a orderly process, the City Council directs that the City Attorney prepare ordinances for vacation and ordinances amending the official street map. Thew ordinances shall be held and presented to the City Council only in conjunction with an approved development plan providing for adequate alternative connections for roads, pedestrian and bike ways, and utilities in the arcs, Part of the City Council's required Findings and Heming Examiner's Recommendations regarding the proposed vacations and amendments to the Offzew Street Map are a finding that the actions are in accordance with the policies of the Comprehensive Plan and the provisions of the Community Development Code. This finding is based in part upon the assumption that future access will be provided during development of the property. Therefore, it is inappropriate to finally adopt ordinances of vacation or amending the Master Street Map until such time as a platting or other development process makes provision for access. DONE this day of , 1996. Mayor Barbara S. Fahey Attest, Sanft S. Chase, City Clerk wasaaao.utr000riacs .3- Over the past several months, I have come to believe several things. One, the likelihood of the ferry terminal moving to the Point Edwards site in the next 15-20 years is very remote. I am in favor of such a i move, but I am afraid the funding is not there to make the move in the foreseeable future. z Safety for citizens that walk, bicycle and drive in our City, as well as for ferry passengers, must be the z z number one concern. This has been my issue all along. The increasing number of trains that pass w through Edmonds every day adds to our concerns for safety. Nothing in the proposed overhead loading q LU project addresses the issue of safety for vehicles, passengers or disabled individuals on the way to and o from the ferry dock. I do not want to paint the Ferry System as the evil party in this situation. They are LO o not opposed to a multimodal site at Point Edwards, but their main responsibility is to provide the best to = level of service that they can for their passengers. They feel they can load more passengers and vehicles —' �- U) LL i in a shorter span of time with overhead loading than they can without overhead loading. They want to do w o } so as soon as possible. < Finally, I believe the overhead loading ramp will be built. David doesn't slay Goliath very often, Angola ��!; doesn't beat the Dream Team and a single entity like our City doesn't stand very much of a chance z m against the Ferry System. But I feel the issue of safety must be addressed now, so while this motion is zwhat I call a watered-down attempt, I am still not very happy with the fact that we have not addressed the Z o safety of people in their ride to and from the ferry dock. zI— g o MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. a tn , o —, o COUNCIL PRESIDENT EARLING MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER VAN "' ' "� HOLLEBEKE THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY PREPARE A DRAFT RESOLUTION CHARGING THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL TO TAKE A LEADERSHIP RESPONSIBILITY IN o . FORMING A PARTNERSHIP TO RESOLVE THE DANGEROUS AT -GRADE ISSUES -- Z RELATED TO THE FERRY, RAILROAD, BUS, AUTO, BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC ui to AT THE INTERSECTION OF RAILROAD AVENUE AND MAIN STREET. POTENTIAL v = PARTNERS FOR THE PARTNERSHIP SHALL INCLUDE, BUT MAY NOT BE LIMITED TO, ~ THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, Z BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD, REGIONAL TRANSIT AUTHORITY, AMTRAK, AND THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AGENCIES RELATED TO HIGHWAYS, FERRIES AND RAILROADS. MOTION CARRIED. COUNCILMEMBER PETRUZZI MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MYER% To i INSTRUCT THE COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTOR TO IMMEDIATELY BEGIN 3 WORKING ON OBTAINING A WRITTEN AGREEMENT AMONG THE APPROPRIATE AGENCIES TO WORK TOGETHER IN ORDER THAT A GRADE -SEPARATED PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY BECOMES A REALITY. THE DIRECTOR IS REQUIRED TO MAKE UPDATE REPORTS TO THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING THE AGREEMENT AND RESULTING PLANS AND WORKS ON THE WALKWAY AT A MINIMUM OF EVERY 60 DAYS. MOTION 0 CARRIED. A five minute break was taken. 5. H { AR N ON A R O CT TO AMEND THE CITY°S OFF�IC AT 4TR�'m *�A'r' "'O n""xfir►�� THAT PORTION OF A PROPOSED 60-FOOT WME RIGHT OF We�_��GIGNATTON BETWEEN O ,YMPI VIFW D IVF AND 80THj 4 NUF �VFS I STARTIN 7T76T NORTrt' OF to IBATH_STREET SOUTHWFCT_ Edmdnds City Council Draft Minutes September 3,1996 Page 8 .t r U0 :n a Cl)w _J Ef) LL f _ o, w w = �j h= z t— �o Z H wW V in a F r R u- O _z LU U) U_ o r z 0II lm7 Scott Snyder, City Attorney, at staffs request, informed the Mayor and Council that Item 6 on the agenda was a related matter and much of the material is the same. He stated that it would be possible to combine both hearings, as long as separate specific motions were made for each hearing issue. Council President Earling stated that a combined hearing would be agreeable as long as when staff refers to the second hearing, they make note of the fact that it is Item 6. ' J� - - ; .Y • .: 1!► ,�. \ • - Jul' /1 . 1 .i/. : ►1.! Mayor Fahey asked if any of the Councilmembers had anything to declare Councilmember Haakenson stated that he did not know the applicant, -nor many of the details of this request, but his business is located kitty-corner on Olympic View Drive and that some of the questions he might ask would be due to his location. Mayor Fahey announced that Mr. Maki, is a friend of her family and that she is aware of the project, but has no vested interest in it. Councilmember Van Hollebeke stated that he knew Mr. Maki but had no previous conversations regarding this project. Scott Snyder, City Attorney, asked Councilmember Haakenson if he owned or leased his business property. Councilmember Haakenson stated that he does Iease the property. Mr. Snyder stated that a proximity to a zoning request was enough to raise the Appearance of Fairness Doctrine, if a person had an ownership interest and could thereby benefit. Mayor Fahey set the parameters for the combined hearings and discussed the timelines given to all participants. Jeff Wilson, Current Planning Supervisor, stated that there are two files: ST 96-77, which is a request to amend the City's official street map; and ST 96-78, which is a request to vacate a portion of public right - Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes September 3, 1996 Page 9 c of -way, Mr. Wilson presented an overhead to Council to help explain the requests to the Council. The first request is amending the official street map and that is i the action which must be considered first, before the Council can vacate a portion of right-of-way. Mr. Wilson reviewed with Council the area surrounding the proposed changes, and exactly what the applicant was requesting, as well as what streets z s z or areas would be effected. Mr. Wilson stated that at the hearing held by the Hearing Examiner, a great deal of the testimony had to do with residents' LU concern over having Iinkage between 80th and Olympic View Drive. Mr. Wilson referred to the street vacation (ST-96-78) that was also being requested and - o stated that in the packet there was an appraisal of the existing right-of-way with a value set at $15,000. Mr. Wilson reviewed with the Council those areas that LOo would be considered acceptable to vacate and areas where the City would continue to retain right-of-way. w UJ -J � i Mr. Wilson clarified that as part of Item 5, the City would be able to provide the same insurance for the UJ p! slope stability along Olympic View Drive through the use of native vegetation, which was not discussed at the Hearing Examiner's hearing. What the Planning Department is suggesting is that under (ST-96- �4 U. 77) the condition #4 of the Hearing Examiner's decision be eliminated and require that the applicant D}; d provide a 20-foot wide easement running parallel to Olympic View Drive from the North to the = Southeast property that would provide slope stability through native growth vegetation. Mr. Wilson outlined how, with future development, there could be linkage with 80th to Olympic View Drive and that due to the topography, finding the right alignment for this connection has always been an issue in trying Z O to develop the property. LULU � a o N Scott Snyder, City Attorney, informed the Council of a recent case by the Washington Court of Appeals, " aLU which is binding, and states the Council does not have the authority to require a developer to either W s U P y dedicate or develop, a road within the development solely for the purpose of providing access for adjacent property owners. 0 , LL z Councihnember Myers inquired as to whether there would be sufficient right-of-way along Olympic Ln v = View Drive for future needs. Mr. Wilson stated that there is sufficient right-of-way to handle future O i—, I needs and the portion of the dedicated right=of--way that the 'City would be giving up, is for protection of z the slope and not widening of the street. Mr. Wilson reviewed the request summarized in Item 6 with Council regarding the vacating of the unused 20-foot right-of-way and areas that would be retained. Mr. Wilson recommended that the Council acknowledge the intent to vacate the areas and then direct staff to go back and prepare the appropriate resolution approving the intent to vacate, including the appropriate legal descriptions. Mr. Wilson then reviewed the actions necessary by the applicant and that they will need to provide in their legal description of the property, the 20-foot wide easement for slope stability, adjacent to Olympic View Drive, to offset the dedication of right-of-way. They will also need to provide the City with a new legal description showing the areas to be vacated which can be incorporated in the appropriate resolution. Staff would then bring the resolution back on a consent agenda for adoption. The additional conditions would call for the applicant to pay the funds indicated in the appraisal, which was $15,000. He explained that since the City would not be taking the total area, after receiving the legal descriptions, some of the cost would be reduced proportionately, and that estimate would also be brought back for Council approval. Charles Maki, 8235 Talbot Road, Edmonds, Mr. Maki informed the Council that he was representing Dr. t B and Mrs. Han Park and does not have any ownership in the project. Mr. Maki stated that it is their intention to subdivide the property on a planned residential basis and would be following all the necessary steps. Mr. Maki reviewed the steps that had been taken as well as the original request for Edmonds City Council llraft Minutes September 3,1996 Page 10 W 0 _ w. wU -O U 0, V)w wS � f— (no w � J LL D U)O x U, Z_ i— �O Z F- LU u, �O �m 0 i- wLL �L LLC _ C 2 wu U = OF Z 24 vacation and the design concepts used in developing a plan for this property. Mr. Maki referred to the petition signed by 39 neighbors and stated that he had spoken with all the neighbors at the Hearing Examiner's hearing, and that they had changed the plan of the subdivision to incorporate a road through to Olympic View Drive. Mr. Maki agreed that the current proposal before the Council would be agreeable to them, and stated that the advantage to the City would be to get a finished street. Councilmember Van Hollebeke inquired if Mr. Maki had any conversations with the owner of Lot 11. Mr. Maki informed the Council that Mr. and Mrs. Earl Smith, owners of Lot 11, have a buy -sell agreement with Dr. Park, would like to sell to Dr. Park, and are aware of what is happening. Scott Snyder, City Attorney, asked Mr. Maki if during his presentation he had stated that the applicant agrees that the amendment of the Street Map with a vacation ordinance would be contingent on developing the dedication of the yet unnamed street and the dedication of a native growth area. Mr. Maki stated this was correct. Mayor Fahey opened the audience comment portion of the hearing. Edward B. Swanson, 8111 182nd St. S.W., Edmonds, stated that he would like to see a road through to Olympic View Drive. Jim Thompson, 18305 80th Ave. W., Edmonds, stated that he owns lot 13, adjacent to the City's property, and the his main concern is getting a way through to Olympic View Drive. He explained that he is concerned about vacating the right-of-way without some assurances that there would be passage from 80th Ave. to Perrinville. Mr. Thompson stated that Mr. Maki's suggestion of a street through on 184th would be ideal. Sally Baringer, Heatherglen Lot 12, stated she is very much effected by this and that during the past 10 or 12 years she has received numerous notifications of different proposed actions. Ms. Baringer referred to the topography of Mr. Smith's property and stated she felt if a road was put in, that this would cause problems with her 30 foot bank. She explained that if the City does develop the road she would request that the bank be rocked. Mayor Fahey inquired if anyone else cared to make comments; hearing none, the Mayor closed the audience portion of the hearing. Councilmember Petruzzi stated that what the staff was proposing made sense to him and that the easement would give the City the control it needed, and in turn, give. the Parks what they needed to be able to develop their property. Councilmember Petruzzi questioned staff about the various areas involved. COUNCILMEMBER PETRUZZI MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER VAN HOLLEBEKE, ON ITEM NO. 5, FOR THE RECOMMENDED ACTION TO ADOPT THE HEARING EXAMINER'S RECOMMENDATION AND APPROVE THE APPLICATION FOR A STREET MAP AMENDMENT WITH THE CONDITIONS RECOMMENDED BY THE HEARING EXAMINER IN ADDITION, THE APPLICANT SHALL BE REQUIRED, AS PART OF ANY DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION, TO PROVIDE A 40-FOOT WIDE CONNECTION BETWEEN OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE AND HIS PORTION OF 184TH STREET SOUTHWEST (File No. ST- 96-78). MOTION CARRIED. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes September 3, 1996 Page 11 C X COUNCILMEMBER MYERS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER HAAKENSON, THAT THE COUNCIL ACKNOWLEDGE THE CITY'S INTENT TO VACATE THE UNUSED RIGHT-OF-WAY ALONG OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE AND THE UNOPENED PORTION OF 184TH STREET SOUTHWEST FROM OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE EAST 253-FEET (BIIe No. ST-96- 77, Hearing Examiner's Decision), SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: LU 1) REQUIRE THE APPLICANT TO PROVIDE THE CITY WITH A 20-FOOT x g WIDE NATIVE GROWTH PROTECTION EASEMENT ALONG THE J U APPLICANT'S ENTIRE FRONTAGE ON OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE. O ,n W 2) THE APPLICANT SHALL PROVIDE A LEGAL DESCRIPTION TO THE CITY WITHIN 21 CALENDAR DAYS. J V) O � 3) AFTER RECEIVING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION THE CITY COUNCIL SHALL PLACE, ON THE NEXT AVAILABLE CONSENT AGENDA, THE < =i , CC RESOLUTION ADOPTING THIS VACATION. U. {' `n a i, 4) THE APPLICANT SHALL PAY TO THE CITY A SUM AGREED UPON BY THE iz = STAFF AND THE APPLICANT FOR THE VACATED PROPERTY. z_ h r- o Scott Snyder, City Attorney, referring to condition #4, brought to Council's attention that state law limits LU= the amount of payback to one half when a person has previously dedicated property to the City. 0 U cn ; MOTION CARRIED. O-': w W 4 Z U : 7. AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO S STANDARD FORM OFACRFFIEteruT TH MERRIT + PARDINI AND APPROVAL cro�crrns+ T TTiB OF FUNDING FOR D _��R OIti i-��Lia., SIG2 u. O A aETy COMPLEX FACILITY z, c0 s' Paul Mar, Community Services Director, reviewed Council's previous actions in advertising, selecting o r' 'and negotiating a contract with Merrit & Pardini. Mr. Mar reviewed the packet contents and asked for z questions from Council. Councilmember Nordquist asked about Exhibit D. Mr. Mar explained that this is Merritt + Pardini's overhead statement for audit purposes and has nothing to do with the City's contract. i COUNCILMEMBER NORDQMST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MYERS, TO APPROVE ITEM 7 AND AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO SIGN STANDARD FORM OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN OWNER AND ARCHITECT WITH MERRITT & PARDINI FOR DESIGN SERVICES ON PUBLIC SAFETY COMPLEX FACILITIES IN THE AMOUNT OF $830,830. MOTION CARRIED. 0 8. DISCUSSION OF FUNDING SOURCE FOR SETTLEMENT EMENT AGREEMENT Council President Earling stated that there was a question of the funding source to pay a settlement that had been allocated to Mr. Pearson. City Attorney Snyder reviewed the actions that had brought this legal matter before Council and indicated that a settlement had been entered into, with the Council's approval, and now the money needs to be moved from the Council Contingency Fund so it can be paid. to COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCH MEMBER VAN HOLLEBEKE, TO AUTHORIZE THE STAFF TO SPEND $5,000 FROM THE COUNCIL Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes September 3,1996 Page 12 00/19/96 THU 13:07 F.4b 20q , 0216 OGDEN MURPHY RkLLACE qU2 P.L.L.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW z �( z .� Suals Ofi'iaa: 2100 Westlake Center Tower, 1601 Fifth Avenue, 5e&ttle, WA 98101.1686 (206) da7-7000 FAX: (206) 447-0215 4LU Ua' FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL, SHEET pate to W Trammitted Uj t=- t 09/19/96 W �? Attention Fax Number Total Pages 4 (W/Cer U-_.page) t_n a a` Sandra S. chase, City Cleric 771-Q2GG z Jeff Wilstul, Planning 771-0221 ,= o City of Edmonds Uj a Original: I l Forwarded [ l Not Forwarded oSender Fax Neer Phone Number z U; Scott Snyder/giz (2� 447-0215 (206)447-7000 �- to OMW Accounting No.: 0006.1$0.071 OIViW File No.t z U -' I RE: Findings of Pact and Crmclusiom s 1 CONEWENTIAL11T NOTE - - The dacument(e) accoaapanying this facsimile trannniss'son oMWas information from the Law Firm of Ogden Murphy Wallnca which le confidaintW or privilaged. The information Is intended to be for the use of the individual Or catity named on this r-- trammittai skeet. 1f you are not the intended rectplent, be &were that any disclosure, copying, distrthuticrat or use of teas cantcnta of this transmitted information is prohibit4 if you have received this facsimile in error, please notiijr us by W*Phone immediately so that we oats arrange for the retrieval of the original documents at no cost to you. 0 tOY , opera^-! 0%4WtOWLiX m'm RuvL�a Osavo6 . . 04J14J48 THU 13.07 PAX 206 447 0216 OCDEN MURPHY WALLACE Q 002 UNMfis OF FACT ,LND coNC IZIOM OF A.W BEFORE THE EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL. z j� = z' w Consolidated hearing ,application of Charles Maki to vacate unused right -of way lying west of LUL Olympic View Drive north of 184th Street, to amend the official street map to remove plan lined U o rights -of -way of 184th Street S.W. 253 feet of right-of-way of 194th Street S.W., to vacate U) W public right-of-way between Olympic View Drive and 76th Avenue W. and an approximately � � l0 to 20-foot-wide portion of the public right -of way on the west side of Olympic View Drive o i north of 184th Street. File No.: ST-96-77, ST-96-78 r_n A } MQCED iR AL HISTORY s �. � z This matter came on for a consolidated hearing before the Edmonds City Council on z o September 3, 1996. Applications to amend the City's official street map to remove 6[l-foot W U; right-of-way between Olympic view Drive and 80th Avenue W. commencing just north of 184th o Street S.W., to vacate an unopened portion of a 20-foot-wide public right-of-way line between o ur Olympic View Drive and approximately 176th Avenue W. and to vacate approximately 10 to View o ~+s 20-foot wide portion of the public right-of-way located on the west side of Olympic Drive _LUrunning north approximately 184th Street S.W. for approximately 270 feet, were combined with LL 0' an application to amend the City's official street map to remove plan lined 60-foot-wide right -of _ z way between Olympic View Drive and 80th Avenue W. starting just north of 184th Street S.W., U reduce the plan lined right-of-way for 184th Street S.W. commencing at Olympic View Drive F- r` westerly for approximately 253 feet, and to remove a plan lined right-of-way lying west of z Olympic view Drive and north of 184th Street S.W. All the proposed requests are located either adjacent to or across the following property addresses: 7704 Olympic View Drive, 18325 80th Avenue W., and 18408 79th Pl. W. This decision is based upon the record before the Edmonds City Council and the record ' and recommendation of the City's Hearing Examiner. The recommendations of the Dearing j Examiner dated July 26, IW6, are adopted as the Council's findings and conclusions except as s' specifically amended herein. ADDITIt7NAL '[`E ML0N1f AND i NF ORMATION 0 At the City Council hearing, the staff recommendation was amended and differed from that presented to the Rearing Examiner. The Hearing Examiner in his findings at page 10, recommendation 4, recommends denial of the request to remove from the official street map of the plan lined right-of-way adjacent to Olympic View Drive. Staff recommended to the City Council that, in conjunction with the platting process, the City's interest of providing slope stability could be achieved through the creation of a native growth protection easement for slope O -1_ , L n W . J V) U- L1.! U. Q: a# z f- �- o, z w Ui '. �a WI r � U- Q _z o~ z Q t© stability rather than a full taking of the property as right-of-way. The purpose for the additional right-of-way was to control vegetation on the slope to enhance stability and that same objective can be achieved through the less intrusive means of a native growth protection easement. . In the course of the hearings, the applicant acknowledged his willingness to await final approval of the vacations and street map amendment until such time as development approval for the property located at 7704 Olympic View Drive, 18325 80th Avenue W- and 18409 79th pl. W, is finally granted. The exact location of interior streets, connections and other required mitigations cannot be finally ascertained until such approvals are complete. LOW44_,01 of 41 The Edmonds City Council therefore concludes that the purposes and objectives of the Edmonds Community Development Code will be met by: 1. Amendment of the Official Street Map to delete the plan line for 60 feet of tight - of -way between Olympic View Drive and 80th Avenue W. in accordance with Exhibit A, Attachment 5, to the Hearing Examminer'& recommendation. 2. Amendment of the Official Street map to delete the plan lined extension of 184th Street S.W. lying east of the proposed plat road, retaining any existing utility easement and to maintain future provisions for utilities. see exhibit A, Attachment 5, to the Dearing Examiner's recommendation. 3. Deny amendment of the official street map to delete the plan lined extension of. 184th St. S.W. lying west of the proposed plat road, In conjunction with the subdivision and development approval for the subject property, that section of right-of-way may be required to be widened and relocated to accommodate a future 184th St. S.W. street extension between the unopened right-of-way south of lot 11 and the future plat road. 4. Approval of the amendment of the official street map to remove 20 ftot of right- of-way adjacent to Olympic View Drive contingent upon: a. Approval of a 20-foot-wide native growth protection easement along the applicant's frontage along Olympic Vicw Drive, the extent and nature of which will be determined as a part of the platting approval process. b. The provision to the City within 21 calendar days to the date of approval of a legal description for the native growth protection easement. c. The payment of compensation for the vacated property in accordance with the submitted appraisal adjusted in accordance with provisions of state law and City ordinance. -2- J O: V) w J f- Ln o w} u. zw e- y: z t-: z o! ww am U a h F� 0 _z LU Ua o~ z 0 t Q 09/10/90 THU 13:03 FAX 206 44T 0213 OGDEN HURPRY WALLACE Q 0p4 �y S. The future application to develop the property owned by the applicant is and shall be subject to all applicable requirements contained in the Edmonds Community Development Code. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to ensure compliance with the various provisions contained in those ordinances. Nothing herein shall be interpreted to prejudge or limit the discretion of the City Council in reviewing such application(s) to finally determine the placement and appropriate route of interior roads and utilities and to mitigate the impacts, if any, from the development. In order to provide for a orderly process, the City Council directs that the City Attorney prepare ordinances for vacation and ordinances amending the official street map. These ordinances shall be held and presented to the City Council only in conjunction with an approved development plan providing for adequate alternative connections for roads, pedestrian and bike ways, and utilities in the arcs, Part of the City Council's required Findings and Hearing Examiner's Recommendations regarding the proposed vacations and amendments to the Official Sfteet Map are a finding that the actions are in accordance with the: policies of the Comprehensive Plan and the provisions of the Community Development Code. This finding is based in part upon the assumption that future access will be provided during development of the property. Therefore, it is inappropriate to finally adopt ordinances of vacation or amending the Master Street Map until such time as a platting or other development process makes provision for access. DONE this _,_,_ day of , 1996. Mayor Barbara S. Fahey Attest: Sandra S. Chase„ City Clerk wmivatmOtWKJ5"1 1- H wcc w� _v UO (1)a w � H� U) O; LU LLj� D d! hs• Z I- I_ 0 Z�— LULU �0 00 U�. 0 f-r S V� u- 0 rZ ui ur V= 0 ~�Z 0 SE Over the past several months, I have come to believe several things. One, the likelihood of the ferry terminal moving to the Point Edwards site in the next 15-20 years is very remote. I am in favor of such a move, but I am afraid the funding is not there to make the move in the foreseeable future. Safety for citizens that walk, bicycle and drive in our City, as well as for ferry passengers, must be the number one concern. This has been my issue all along. The increasing number of trains that pass through Edmonds every day adds to our concerns for safety. Nothing in the proposed overhead loading project addresses the issue of safety for vehicles, passengers or disabled individuals on the way to and from the ferry dock. I do not want to paint the Ferry System as the evil party in this situation. They are not opposed to a multimodal site at Point Edwards, but their main responsibility is to provide the best level of service that they can for their passengers. They feel they can load more passengers and vehicles in a shorter span of time with overhead loading than they can without overhead loading. They want to do so as soon as possible. Finally, I believe the overhead loading ramp will be built. David doesn't slay Goliath very often, Angola doesn't beat the Dream Team and a single entity like our City doesn't stand very much of a chance against the Ferry System. But I feel the issue of safety must be addressed now, so while this motion is what I call a watered-down attempt, I am still not very happy with the fact that we have not addressed the safety of people in their ride to and from the ferry dock. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. COUNCIL PRESIDENT EARLING MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER VAN HOLLEBEKE, THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY PREPARE A DRAFT RESOLUTION CHARGING THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL TO TAKE A LEADERSHIP RESPONSIBILITY IN FORMING A PARTNERSHIP TO RESOLVE THE DANGEROUS AT -GRADE ISSUES RELATED TO THE FERRY, RAILROAD, BUS, AUTO, BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC AT THE INTERSECTION OF RAILROAD AVENUE AND MAIN STREET. POTENTIAL PARTNERS FOR THE PARTNERSHIP SHALL INCLUDE, BUT MAY NOT BE LIMITED TO, THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD, REGIONAL TRANSIT AUTHORITY, AMTRAK, AND THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AGENCIES RELATED TO HIGHWAYS, FERRIES AND RAILROADS. MOTION CARRIED. COUNCILMEMBER PETRUZZI MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MYERS, TO INSTRUCT THE COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTOR TO IMMEDIATELY BEGIN WORKING ON OBTAINING A WRITTEN AGREEMENT AMONG THE APPROPRIATE AGENCIES TO WORK TOGETHER IN ORDER THAT A GRADE -SEPARATED PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY BECOMES A REALITY. THE DIRECTOR IS REQUIRED TO MAKE UPDATE REPORTS TO THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING THE AGREEMENT AND RESULTING PLANS AND WORKS ON THE WALKWAY AT A MINIMUM OF EVERY 60 DAYS. MOTION CARRIED. REQUEST A five minute break was taken. 5. HEARING ON A • AMENDxHE CITY,,$ OFFICIAL STREET MAp To REMOVE strftt map BETWEEN \ # _ U ' , / • . DRIVE AND 801H AVENUE WEST J► jusT NORTH + 1&41H STREET -SOUTHWEST. ADDITIONAILL-THE APPLICANT REQUESTS, To REMOVE I E DESIGNATION OF TH VIEW DRIVE AND PRQCEEDING WEST A 253 FEET; AND Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes page 8 n "SUBSTANTIALLY COMPLETED" MITIGATION PROJECT IS DEFINED TO REQUIRE, AT A MINIMUM, ALL FUNDS HAVE BEEN SECURED AND APPROPRIATED, ALL PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS HAVE BEEN COMPLETED AND APPROVED, ALL PERMITS HAVE BEEN ISSUED, AND ALL CONTRACTS NECESSARY TO COMMENCE CONSTRUCTION HAVE ¢ F-1`E BEEN AWARDED. NOTHING HEREIN SHALL BE INTERPRETED TO = uj PROHIBIT THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST FOR EXTENSION (211. ABOVE) OR x g FOR PERMANENT APPROVAL (21). ABOVE) IN THE ABSENCE OF A < v "SUBSTANTIALLY COMPLETED" MITIGATION PROJECT. IN THE EVENT J 0 THAT THE APPLICANT PROCEEDS WITH A REQUEST FOR EXTENSION n w (2B. ABOVE) OR FOR PERMANENT APPROVAL (21). ABOVE) IN THE J M ABSENCE OF A "SUBSTANTIALLY COMPLETED" MITIGATION PROJECT, Cn U. i ISSUES RELATING TO PEDESTRIAN SAFETY AND RELATED TRAFFIC w O' SAFETY IMPACTS FROM WSF'S OVERHEAD LOADING/PEDESTRIAN 2 TERMINAL BUILDING PROJECT CONSTRUCTED UNDER THIS PERMIT, < AND ANY EXTENSIONS THERETO, SHALL BE FULLY CONSIDERED AS U. j �i PART OF THIS APPLICATION REVIEW PROCESS. cJi � r 3. PRIOR TO APPLICATION TO THE CITY'S ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD FOR Z i-- FINAL APPROVAL, THE APPLICANT SHALL COORDINATE WITH THE EDMONDS H O PARKS AND RECREATION DIVISION MANAGER REGARDING COMMON w w TREATMENTS FOR LIGHTING IN THE EASTERN TERMINAL ENTRANCE AND 2 O DESIGN OF THE CONCRETE SIDEWALK AT THE TERMINAL ENTRANCE TO V ENSURE COORDINATION WITH THE PROPOSED PARK (BRACKETT'S LANDING O "5 R SOUTH) CONSTRUCTION PROJECT TO THE SOUTH (SEE EXHIBIT A, �� ATTACHMENT 26) O . 4. PRIOR TO THE APPLICATION FOR A BUILDING PERMIT OR THE BEGINNING OF '- Z SITE DEVELOPMENT WORK, THE APPLICANT SHALL APPLY FOR AND RECEIVE W tn' APPROVAL FROM THE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD FOR ALL SITE r DEVELOPMENT IMPROVEMENTS. O Z 5. THE MAXIMUM ELEVATION OF THE PROPOSED PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY SHALL NOT EXCEED 49.75 FEET ABOVE MLLW. 6. CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATION SHALL NOT BE GIVEN BY THE CITY UNTIL A MINIMUM OF 30 DAYS AFTER FINAL CITY APPROVAL. 7. IF THE PEDESTRIAN TRANSFER SPAN NEEDS TO BE HIGHER THAN 49.75 FEET _ ABOVE MLLW TO PROVIDE SAFE PEDESTRIAN ACCESS WHEN A FERRY IS IN } PORT DURING PERIODS OF HIGH TIDES, THEN IT MUST BE LOWERED TO NO MORE THAN 49.75 FEET ABOVE MLLW AFTER THE FERRY LEAVES. © Councilmember Roger Myers then made the following remarks: I have spent a great deal of time over the past several weeks reviewing and analyzing the matter of the overhead loading at the ferry terminal, and it has been a very good experience for me. I have read, re- read, pondered, analyzed and studied the issues from as many perspectiyes as I could think of. When an issue impacts our community I am heartened by the number of people who feel strongly about our City and its future. Regardless of the position they take, or what side of the issue they are on, our community is stronger because there are so many people that truly care about our City. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes September 3, 1996 Page 7 0 fir: w LU -U Ua to a to LU J �— N 0I UJ � F— J LL s UJ 1-- Z f— �-O LULU U to 0- at-- LU LU =U u- C —Z tii cf. U _ or Z REMOVE THE DESIGNATION OF A PORTION OF THE UNUSED RI HT OF WAY LYING WEST OF Oi YMPIC VIEW DRIVE AND NORTH OF IHE tRdTH STRFFm SOUT nY ES FIGHT -OF WAY. TO ALT.OW, A VACATION OF THE SUBJECT RIC.HTS-OF-WAY PURSUANT_TO AN APPLICATION SUBMITTED UNDER CITY OF FDrrnn7nC or A rwrt Tn DIVISION FILE NO. ST-96-78 ALL OF TH"HOPOSED REQUESTS DISCUS, AROyE Any ie�nATT+ jTH R ADJACENT TO OR ACROSS TH • FO OWIN PROP .RTY ADDRESSES: 7704 OL,yMPIC VIEW DR 18325 80TH AVE W , AND 18408 79TH P t'l (Applicant Charles 24,a1 '1 File no. Scott Snyder, City Attorney, at staff's request, informed the Mayor and Council that Item 6 on the agenda was a related matter and much of the material is the same. He stated that it would be possible to combine both hearings, as long as separate specific motions were made for each hearing issue. Council President Earling stated that a combined hearing would be agreeable as long as when staff refers to the second hearing, they make note of the fact that it is Item 6. Haring. 6• HEARING DNA -REQUEST TO VACATE THE UNOPENED PORTION OF TH 2QFOOT 1' IDF Repat to PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY LYING BETWEEN OLYM IC VIEW DRIVE ANDv`ai APPROXIMATELY 7 6TH AVENUE WEST: T; =AND, A REQUEST TO VACATE AN n•aw APPROXIMATELY 10 - 20-FOOT WTDF,_ ST•96-78 AP-P&OED ON TIIF, - 20 SIDE OF O .Y�MPI ON OF THE PUBLIC RT GHT-OF-WAY DRIVE RUNNING NORTH OF APPROXIMATELY 184THTH STREET SOUTHWEST APPROXIMAT T Y 270 FEET THE PROPOSED RI HTS OF WAY VACATIONS ARE LOCATED ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY AT 7704 O .YMPIC VIEW DRIVE, (Applicant• Charles MakitFile No ST- 6-78) Mxayor Fahey asked if any of the Councilmembers had anything to declare. Councilmember Haakenson stated that he did not know the applicant, nor many of the details of this request, but his business is located kitty-corner on Olympic View Drive and that some of the questions he might ask would be due to his location. Mayor Fahey announced that Mr. Maki, is a friend of her family and that she is aware of the project, but has no vested interest in it. Councilmember Van Hollebeke stated that he knew Mr. Maki but had no previous conversations regarding this project. Scott Snyder, City Attorney, asked Councilmember Haakenson if he owned or leased his business property. Councilmember Haakenson stated that he does lease the property. Mr. Snyder stated that a proximity to a zoning request was enough to raise the Appearance of Fairness Doctrine, if a person had an ownership interest and could thereby benefit. Mayor Fahey set the parameters for the combined hearings and discussed the timelines given to all participants. Jeff Wilson, Current Planning Supervisor, stated that there are two files: ST-96-77, which is a request to amend the City's official street map; and ST-96-78, which is a request to vacate a portion of public right- of-way. Mr. Wilson presented an overhead to Council to help explain the requests to the Council. The first request is amending the official street map and that is the action which must be considered first, Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes September 3,1996 Page 9 before the Council can vacate a portion of right-of-way. Mr. Wilson reviewed with Council the area surrounding the proposed changes, and exactly what the applicant was requesting, as well as what streets or areas would be effected. Mr. Wilson stated that at the hearing held by the Hearing Examiner, a great deal of the testimony had to do with residents' concern over having linkage between 80th and Olympic View Drive. Mr. Wilson referred to the street vacation (ST-96-78) that was also being requested and stated that in the packet there was an appraisal of the existing right-of-way with a value set at $15,000. Mr. Wilson reviewed with the Council those areas that would be considered acceptable to vacate and areas where the City would continue to retain right-of-way. Mr. Wilson clarified that as part of Item 5, the City would be able to provide the same insurance for the slope stability along Olympic View Drive through the use of native vegetation, which was not discussed at the Hearing Examiner's hearing. What the Planning Department is suggesting is that under (ST-96- 77) the condition #4 of the Hearing Examiner's decision be eliminated and require that the applicant provide a 20-foot wide easement running parallel to Olympic View Drive from the North to the Southeast property that would provide slope stability through native growth vegetation. Mr. Wilson outlined how, with future development, there could be linkage with 80th to Olympic View Drive and that due to the topography, finding the right alignment for this connection has always been an issue in trying to develop the property. Scott Snyder, City Attorney, informed the Council of a recent case by the Washington Court of Appeals, which is binding, and states the Council does not have the authority to require a developer to either dedicate or develop a road within the development solely for the purpose of providing access for adjacent property owners. Councilmember Myers inquired as to whether there would be sufficient right-of-way along Olympic View Drive for future needs. Mr. Wilson stated that there is sufficient right-of-way to handle future needs and the portion of the dedicated right-of-way that the City would be giving up, is for protection of the slope and not widening'of the street. Mr. Wilson reviewed the request summarized in Item 6 with Council regarding the vacating of the unused 20-foot right-of-way and areas that would be retained. Mr. Wilson recommended that the Council acknowledge the intent to vacate the areas and then direct staff to go back and prepare the appropriate resolution approving the intent to vacate, including the appropriate legal descriptions. Mr. Wilson then reviewed the actions necessary by the applicant and that they will need to provide in their legal description of the property, the 20-foot wide easement for slope stability, adjacent to Olympic View Drive, to offset the dedication of right-of-way. They will also need to provide the City with a new legal description showing the areas to be vacated which can be incorporated in the appropriate resolution. Staff would then bring the resolution back on a consent agenda for adoption. The additional conditions would call for the applicant to pay the fiends indicated in the appraisal, which was $15,000. He explained that since the City would not be taking the total area, after receiving the legal descriptions, some of the cost would be reduced proportionately, and that estimate would also be brought back for Council approval. Charles Maki, 8235 Talbot Road, Edmonds, Mr. Maki informed the Council that he was representing Dr. and Mrs. Han Park and does not have any ownership in the project. Mr. Maki stated that it is their intention to subdivide the property on a planned residential basis and would be following all the necessary steps. Mr. Maki reviewed the steps that had been taken as well as the original request for vacation and the design concepts used in developing a plan for this property. Mr. Maki referred to the petition signed by 39 neighbors and stated that he had spoken with all the neighbors at the Hearing Examiner's hearing, and that they had changed the plan of the subdivision to incorporate a road through Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes September 3, 1996 Page 10 u 1 CITY OF EDMO DS BARBARA FAHEY G MAYOR 250 6TH AVENUE NORTH - EDMONDS, WA 96020 + (206) 771-0220 + FAX 1206) 771.0221 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT fist, Public Works • Planning • Parks and Recreation • Engineering Z 1890 Letter of Transmittal o! at Lul Date: September 27,1996 o To: Charles Maki ¢ , 8235 Talbot Rd. CI 0 Edmonds, WA 98026 w' Subject: ST-96-77 & ST-96-78' 0 r—: L,: o` Transmitting Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law D h� For Your Information: XX o, As you requested: �. For your file: I Comment: Note attachments: ®t® Sincerely, Diane M. Cunningham, Administrative Assistant EDMO S ITY OF 250 S Ave N Edmo WA 98020 David Johnson 7810 182nd P1 SW Edmonds, WA 98026 Wallace Danielson Jr. Susan Danielson Jr. 7822 182nd P1 SW Edmonds, WA 98026 Linda McCullough 18426 79th Pl W Edmonds, WA 98026 Richard &Tina O'Neill 18414 79th P1 W Edmonds, WA. 98026 John iieuerman 18419 79th Pi W Edmonds, WA 98026 Arne otA 1722 ##201 Seatt 98155 Earl Smith 18325 80th Ave W Edmonds, WA 98026 Han & Regina Park 7704 Olympic View Dr. Edmonds, WA-98026 } UNITED STATES POSTAL SER 850 Cherry Ave San Bruno, CA 94099 Lars & Paulette Johnson 8514 192nd St SW Edmonds, WA 98026 John & Muriel Quick 7914`182nd Pi SW Edmonds, WA 98026 Dana Gillet PO, Box 7026- Lynnwood, WA 98046 Robert Joss • 18415 79th P1 W Edmonds, WA 98026 William Q I,�� �„ it42'T 79th Pl W Edmonds, WA 98026 F A & Gloria Lafond 18227 80th Ave W Edmonds, WA 98026 U E P SERVICE 850 Ch ry Ave San B CA 94099 John Mellor 606 Sater Lane Edmonds, WA 98020 Roland & Julie Brown 7809 182nd Pi SW Edmonds, WA 98026 Kathleen O'gryan 7817 182nd Pl SW Edmonds, WA 98026 Gary & Charlene Ramm 18418 79th Pl W Edmonds, WA 98026 Norman Barringer 18405 79th P1 W Edmonds, WA 98026 Glenn Roberts 18416 78th Ave W Edmonds, WA 98026 —Katherine- Morley 18203.80th Ave W Edmonds, WA 98026 James Thompson 18305 80th Ave W Edmonds, WA 98026 Charles Maki 8235 Talbot Rd. Edmonds, WA 98026 J.L. Thompson 18305 80th Ave. W. Edmonds, WA 98026 Joe Scialdone 18332 80th Ave. W. Edmonds, WA 98026 t t y.. L} _.a.veF ..... .:.-rgl,nAa.X vS+.N^.5.rrt .+.L+ke. _.,, +n..+o- rn ry •u-nn• n.w rru ue«u..x..H sx rc +vatvrr Wsaaw xhn•rwMrJ� .n.n.w...r:..««. vwwx-. .. nr r': .. . •.• '. i ' ...,_... w«. +.- .... n .+rw• N '!' Betty; Smith 18208 80th Ave. W. Diane Broughton/Edith Broughton Chris Hammond z( Edmonds, WA 98026 8006 181st ST. SW Edmonds, WA 98026 8010 181st P1. SW Edmonds; WA 98026 f- UJ' a =j Bill Rankin 80.05 181st p1 SW'- Van Gossett/Lynda Hughes Resident J u; v a' n, Edmonds, WA 98026 18105-.80th Ave. W. Edmonds, WA,98026 8006 180th'Pl. SW Edmonds,, WA 98026 �w UJ Ln U. w O Terry Lee Walton 7922 180th St. SW Gretchen Copeland Resident Q Edmonds, WA 98026 7821 182nd P1. SW Edmonds, WA 98026 8010`181st Pi SW. Edmonds, WA 98026 us d� s,j, w Resident 18226'80th Ave. W. Resident 18203 80th Ave'. W. Resident 791?`-182nd P1. SW Edmonds, WA 98026 Edmonds, WA 98026 Edmonds, WA 98026 �o Z3 cn L' W Resident 7822 182nd P1. SW Kathleen O'Bryan 7817 182nd SW Resident — Z} Edmonds, WA 98026 -PI . Edmonds; WA 98026 8019"181st P1. SW Edmonds, WA 98026 v o� z Resident 8018 181st Pl. SW Resident 8011 180th-Pl. SW Resident 18012 180th Pl. SW Edmonds, WA 98026 Edmonds, WA 98026 Edmonds, WA 98026 Resident 18017 80th Ave. W: Resident 8111 182nd St. SW Resident 8110 182nd St. SW t Edmonds, WA 98026 ?' Edmonds, WA 98026 Edmonds, WA 98026 Gloria & Francis La Fond 18227 80th Ave. W. Resident r 18324 81st Ave. W. Ronald &Yvonne Mattison Edmonds, WA 98026 Edmonds. WA 98026 8111 184th St. SW Fdrr,,,, rfc ion nonoc • AUG ., 996 aJ PLAMbjjvCj • • • • To: Jeff Wilson, City of Edmonds Company - Fax number: +1(206)12067710221 Business phone: From: Ron Thomas Fax number: +1 (206) 824-8923 Business phone: Home phone: Date & Time: 8/1919S 12:00:53 PM Pages: 2 Re: ROW Appraisal Jeff, The following Is a summary of the above referenced appraisal and the final value determination process. 0 Ito is RoN TmOMAS REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL AND DEVELOPMENT CONSULTING OW 824.8923 August 19., 1996 City of Edmonds LL Planning Department 0( 250 5thAvenue North Edmonds, WA 98020 LU u Attn: Jeff Wilson I-- =: RE: Columbia Valuation Group Inc. Appraisal Job No. 96-098 Z �-: f- 0: Right-of-11Tay parcel at 184th Street SW and Olympic View Drive, City of Edmonds Z f-! LU UJI u 2 =); :D cl' I am responding to your inquin, regarding the final value determination of the above referenced U C6 0— proporty. The search for comparable land sales was conducted throughout the subject market LU area and revealed no sales of right-of-way sites or other property condemnations. The sales be for due to Xc selected Nvere determined to the best indicators of market value the subject various topographical constraints and location similarities of these Sales. Adjustments were used to U. O�� Z, i indicate the site differences in size and building lot status, The subject value was based on the CLi cni. weighted averaging of the three, adjusted sales and then rounded down to $15,000 to indicate U that the value was within the lower range of value for these sales. 0 Z If you have any questions regarding this matter, please me or Mike McMahon at 364-8580. Respectfully, Ron Thomas Associate Appraiser tell 0- -41 1t 0 % 7� r �:,: Crate: Tuesday, August 13, 199e Time: 11:05 AM To: Kirk Vinish Company: Planning Dept., City of Edmonds Fax Phone #: 771-0221 CC: From: Charles Maki Subject: Requested letter for postponement Total # of Rages (including cover): 2 Memo: If all pages were not received, please call back immediately: cn u., O w }� �CI S wi � s z O Z H. ww 5 of Q i1_— S V u- O z U o~ z _ RECEivr=D JUL 0 2 IN Affidavit of Publication EDMONDSCITY CLERK STATE OF WASHiNGTON, n. �I The undersigned, being first duly sworn on oath deposes and says that she is Principal Clerk of THE HERALD, a daily newspaper 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's legal newspaper by order of the Superior Court of Snohomish County and that the notice ........................................ Public Hearing & Development of Application ...................................................................................................................................... John & Julie-Twenter ....................................................................................... File No. CU-96-53 ...................................................................................................................................... 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: June 30, 1996 ........................................................................................................................... 4}nd hat said newspaper was re 1 ly ributed to its subscribers du ' all of said period. .�I......................... ..... ..... .............. Principal Clerk Subscribed and sworn to before me this ........... 1 s t day..................... Ju((I"�Y........... ........................... 19...96 ..........1. 1....... .......... ...................................:............ Notary Pubhe m and fort a St to of Washington, residing at Everett, Snoh Count ,BE J W °5S10H 4 4 .4QTAq.- PUBLIC' 2 �� s-� s•sa a� °F WASH°:/' t JULY 12,1996 PLEASE PRINT LEGIBLY YOUR NAME ADDRESS,ZIP CODE AND PHONE NUMBER BELOW IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM ST-96-77 CHARLES MAKI 7 VW �rA WX N of In W w Ln UO LU m � R -J LL MUJ: ; z F- 01 z Lu Ux 0 ,u x F- z uj cn 0 z s t o A. Planning Division Staff Advisory Report (prepared 7/3L26). 3 c io- I CL '7 '7 l cl 6 (YR)-(#)EXI( DATE). REPORTMSTAFREXH [BITS J%r"i4 ic.J V r.AJ Joe Sciaidone � it i a 183forWs Avenue West �G11�Y!! i ' 1/ �f (R Edrtands, Wa. 9®026 � i 07/07/96 re: Charles Maki - Notice of Development Application & Public Hearing. July 12, 1996. To whom it may concern: As a resident of the immediate area of concern in the Notice of Development Application & Public Hearing, dated June 28, 19981 have a concern: The application asks for the city to vacate a portion of 184th Avenue S.W. which is the eastern % of the street between 80th Ave. W. And Olympic View Dr.1 have no opposition to any other part of the application, except this portion. The residents who life in the area to the West, North and South of the 184th and 80th intersection are in dire need of easier access to the Perrinvilie area. Too much traffic is routed far around and thru this intersection to get to Perrinville. This puts far to many cars and trucks, as well as school busses on 80th Ave. West. The vacation of this street right of way would perminentiy eliminate the present or future possibility of connecting this area thru to Olympic View Dr. Many of the residents in the area would be in favor of widening and connecting 184th thru to connect to the proposed new cul-de-sac as presented on the applicants preliminary site plan (please see enclosed drawing). This could be made a condition of the vacation to the remainder of the street and the proposal to remove the 80ft. right of way. A four way stop sign should also be Installed at the intersection of 184th and 801h. This type of Improvement would be of major help to eliminate much traffic on 8Mh Ave. West. Thank you: Joe Scialdone 194TH.DOC /~y 1, 776 —1 i bon �SQss 19105 &6A u) ! 77 6 —23Ll _good. eo.i.6 el,s,� i s� ^' 77 g"•. J .5^i f W22 ..j82 P/ Stv G7� .3Z.3R 9 3a. ��.. pt .s.. 7-75 05 8a c( tK6 U Al. - i 7q-&557 z-� 0 J F— 1 � a F W' Z h. a cn: o -1 u i F� La z U= o z i E IE A9 9 r_= 55 10012, /(f$4PL S wMa� b7�- W g rl ; t fir' � 5- �, 7 7 L— Sir drs r i �7 ell� 77S'aa=41 1..4 14e 7-74--3941 fg334-ever sf 1,?33V Io$jdd deb 77,7 -g��q 77e- yKZ9 i 3-Al I"w M, S E A V I E W 14 F---------- 13 -- — — — -------- I :WAS 12 al F I R S\\2 7 OIL May 184th ST. S.W.OPEN-: \H I D D E GLEN 12 10 13 I i i------- — 14 Bi 1 L — — — — — — — 8 1g1 I CL 15 5--I 17 --------- 16 I - 3� E D 0 N D S' SEAV I E 8\\17 is 19 20 21 oo, 5 185 th PLACE S.W. — — — — — — — — — — A, .4 3 w 0 Mto �-s t. 18 9' Date: To: Subject: Transmitting 4 CITY OF EDMONDS BARBARA FAHEY MAYOR 250 5TH AVENUE NORTH - EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (206) 771.0220 • FAX (206) 771-0221 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT Public Works • Planning • Parks and Recreation • Engineering Letter of Transmittal July 5, 1996 Charles Maki 8235 Talbot Rd. Edmonds, WA 98026 Hearing Examiner Meeting of 7/12/96 Agenda & Staff Report For Your Information: XX As you requested: For your file: Comment: Note attachments: Sincerely, Diane M. Cunningham, Planning Secretary cc: Ron McConnell, Hearing Examiner Han & Regina Park John Mellor 0 Incorporated August 11, 1890 0 Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan 0 Notice of Development Application &Public Hearing Dated Notice: June 28, 1996 File # ST-96-77 & ST-96-78 Applicant Information Permit Information Name of Applicant: ................ p Charles Maki Requested Permits a Street Map Amendment & Street _. and Approvals :.................. Vacation : Dale of Application............ 9 5/30/96 Date application Complete:.._ a 6/28196 Other Required Permits not Z) Unknown - yet applied for (if known):. Project Location:, .......... * Adjacent to, or across 7704 Olympic Required Studies related O N/A View Dc, 18325 80th Ave. W. & 18408 79th Pl. W. to the project .................... Project Description............-. 9 A Street Map Amendment to remove Related Environmental O SEPA and Critical Areas Checklist proposed 60-foot right-of-way between Documents :........................ Olympic V'ew Dr & 80th Ave W Also, a Street Vacation to vacate the eastem 1/2 of 184th St. between Olympic View Dr. & 801h Ave. W., & that portion m unused nght-of-way on the west side of Olympic View Dr. extending 270-feet north of the 184th St, dsht ..,way - Public Hearing Information I Date: July 12, 1996 Time: 9:00 A.M. Place: Community Services Conference Room, 250 5th Avenue North - The dechrom on this development application will be made within 120 days of the date of the Letter of Completeness, with allowances madefor'studies and additional information requests. Note that ability to appeal adecision is contrngenfupon panic patron in the permit d on The removal, removal, mutilation, destruction, or concealment of this This notice may be removed - Warning! notice before the hearing date is a miademeanor punishable by after: July 12 1996 fine and imprisonment 'a °�i 1b 32XI❑ 25XII iiVW;i�e"x uk, Edmn WA .98020 z David Johnson 7810 182nd PI SW Edmonds, WA 98026 01 Q; Wallace Danielson Jr. Cn WSusan X Danielson Jr. Uj 7822 182nd P1 SW U) LL 01 Edmonds, WA 98026 cn ; Linda McCullough W" 18426 79th P1 w Edmonds, WA 98026 Z W WW',Richard & TinaLO'Neill 0 0 7- ; ' t= 18414 79th P1 W LU L�u Edmonds, WA 98026 i z I John Heuerman 91- 18419 79th Pi w Z Edmonds, WA 98026 Arne o c 1722 #201 5 Seatt", A 98155 Earl Smith 18325 80th Ave w Edmonds, WA 98026 Han & Regina Park 7704 Olympic View Dr. Edmonds, WA 98026 UNITED STATES POSTAL SER 850 Cherry Ave San Bruno, CA 94099 Lars & Paulette Johnson 8514 192nd St sw Edmonds, WA 98026 John & Muriel Quick 7914 182nd Pl SW Edmonds, WA 98026 Dana Gillet PO Box 7026- Lynnwood, WA 98046 Robert Joss 18415 79th P1 w Edmonds, WA 98026 William 1b427­79th P1 w Edmonds, WA 98026 F A & Gloria Lafond 18227 80th Ave w Edmonds, WA .98026 U S P , SERVICE 850 Ch ry .17 3PK Ave San B CA 9409.9 John Mellor 606 Sater Lane Edmonds, WA 98020 Roland & Julie Brown 7809 182nd P1 sw Edmonds, WA 98026 Kathleen O'Bryan 7817 182nd P1 SW Edmonds, WA 98026 Gary & Charlene Ramm 18418 79th Pi W Edmonds, WA 98026 Norman Barringer 18405 79th P1'W Edmonds, WA 98026 Glenn Roberts 18416 78th Ave W Edmonds, WA 98026 .—Katherine-Morley 18203 80th Ave w Edmonds, WA 98026 James Thompson 18305 80th Ave W Edmonds, WA 98026 Charles Maki 8235 Talbot Rd. Edmonds, WA 98026 Document3 FILE NO.: ST-96-77 APPLICANT: MAKI NOTICE OF HEARING AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING STATE OF WASHINGTON } COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH } 1, Kirk Vinish, first duly sworn, on oath, depose and say: I That on the 28th day of June,1996, the attached Notice of Public Hearing was posted as prescribed by Ordinance, and in any event, in the Civic Center and the Library, and where applicable on or near the subject property. Signed Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of Notary Public in and for the S to of Washington: Residing at4Q4tle-� DOCUMC 2 ,rrv. _ ,• a .� = Z rUJ LU J 0 U10 Ui LU Lus J i--: U)LL Lu Qc LL N w' zI-- 1.- 0 z LU = � 0 0 in oi,- LU LLD —z U; ca _ 0 z F 0 t CITY OF EDMONDS BARBARA FAHEY MAYOR 250 5TH AVENUE NORTH - EDMONDS, WA 98020 - (206) 771.0220 - FAX (206) 771-0221 HEARING EXAMINER I -QSt. 189v FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE HEARING EXAMINER CITY OF EDMONDS APPLICANT: Charles Maki CASE NO.: ST 96-77 LOCATION: 7704 Olympic View Drive (see Exhibit A, Attachments 1 and 4) APPLICATION: This application is to amend the City's Official Street Map to remove that portion of proposed 60-foot wide right-of-way designation between Olympic View Drive and 80th Avenue West starting just north of 184th Street Southwest. Additionally, the applicant wants to: a. remove the designation of the existing 20- foot wide right-of-way of 184th Street Southwest starting at Olympic View Drive and proceeding west approximately 253 feet; and b. remove the designation of a portion of the unused right-of- way lying west of Olympic View Drive and north of 184th Street Southwest right-of-way, to allow a vacation of the subject right-of- way pursuant to an application submitted under City of Edmonds Planning Division File No. ST-96-78 (see Exhibit A, Attachment 1). REVIEW PROCESS: Street Map Amendment; Hearing Examiner conducts public hearing and makes recommendation to the City Council. MAJOR ISSUES: a. Compliance with Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Section 20.65 (STREET MAP CHANGES). b. Compliance with Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Chapter 15.05 (COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - PURPOSES). c. Compliance with Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Chapter 15.40 (COMPREHENSIVE STREET PLAN - PURPOSES). d. Compliance with Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Chapter 18.50 (OFFICIAL STREET MAP). SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff: Partial approval with conditions Hearing Examiner: Partial approval with conditions • Incorporated August 11, 1890 • Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan FS 4i C7 -71 t_ z`' f— w CC 2 wL J U 00 va a w LU N }}LL- i LU � Bj 01 r z;. z_ E- �- o' z L)tn 1 =U LLO —z w(n L) _ o� z EVA r0 i Hearing Examiner Recommendation Case No. ST 96-77 Page 2 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 Maki application was opened at 10:51 a.m., July 12, 1996, in the Community Services Conference Room, 250 5 h Avenue, Edmonds, Washington, and closed at 11:50 a.m Participants at the public hearing and the exhibits offered and entered are listed this report. A verbatim recording of the hearing is available in the Planning Division. HEARING TESTIMONY: The following is a summary of the testimony offered at the public hearing. From the City: Kirk Vinish, AICP, Planner, reviewed the Planning Division Advisory Report (Exhibit A) and discussed concerns expressed by neighbors about losing a possible connection to Olympic View Drive. Gordy Hyde, Engineering Coordinator, reviewed the Engineering Division report (Exhibit A, Attachment 6) and said: • When the dottedd lines were put on the Official Street Map for rights -of -way designations the roads were not intended to be located exactly within the dotted lines. • The property where the post office is now located was owned by the City and was considered to be a possible fire station location. • The dotted lines indicate a rough location for a connection to Olympic View Drive. • The existing 20 foot wide right-of-way could be used for.- * pedestrian access ♦ utility access ♦ emergency access • A 30 foot wide right-of-way would be needed to allow for a 24 foot wide roadway. From the Applicant: John Mellor, Agent for the Applicant, said: • It would be very difficult to widen Olympic Drive in this area due to the topography and removing a portion of the unused right-of-way along Olympic Way would help the applicant with lot yield. ME z'. LU • The "S" curve shown in dotted lines won't work anymore and should be deleted. �, From the Community: U O cn u LU Earl Smith, neighbor, gave a history of roads in the area and spoke in favor of vacating the 20 LU h I foot wide right-of-way. N LLJ - O• g Joe Scialdone, Neighbor Jim Thompson, Neighbor Ed Swanson, Neighbor z o ` Katherine Morley, Neighbor z Francis LaFond, Neighbor _Q ww All spoke in favor of keeping an option open to provide an access from 8& Avenue West to o Olympic View Drive. They said: c-� m;: o • They didn't think a road could be built in the location of the "S" curve, but felt a tie to L) Perrinville is critical. .. z • They felt a roadway connection from 80a' Avenue West to the proposed cut -de -sac in the Uta approximate location of the existing 20 foot right-of-way is possible. z • Most didn't think the City should give up any right-of-way on Olympic View Drive. • A lot of traffic now uses 8& West which is a narrow road. Another connection to Olympic View would reduce some of the traffic volume on 8& West. • The 20 foot right-of-way should not be vacated, but rather should be explored as a - ----.- possible location for a link between the new cul-de-sac and Olympic View Drive. Response from the Applicant: © John Mellor said: • If the right-of-way along Olympic View Drive were vacated as requested, Olympic Drive would still have a 70 foot wide right-of-way. • It would be possible from an engineering standpoint to connect the new cul-de-sac to 8& to West, but the police and fire departments saw no need during the review of the application. t j, • The sight distance on 8& West is tough. • The applicant does not want a connection from 8& West to Olympic View Drive to go through his new subdivision. ® 6.. a (4 Kirk Vinish said one option is to remove the right-of-way along Olympic View from the rz- official map, but then have the applicant give the City a maintenance easement. 0: CORRESPONDENCE: c o' c`nr, L, Joe Scialdone submitted Exhibit B which was signed by 39 persons. The letter expressed no � h opposition to any part of the application, except the requested vacation of the eastern 1h of UJLL 0. 18e Ave. S.W. between 8& and Olympic View Drive. C The residents in the area want to make sure the present or future ability to connect 8& West cn with Olympic View Drive is not eliminated. _ wii Z 1-1 The letter had a map attached which showed removal of the "S" curve right-of-way lines and p, retention of the existing 20 foot wide right-of-way. z LULU Q FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS a —} W L A. SITE DESCRIPTION U U' 1. Site Development And Zoning: — o:. z' ui cn' a. Facts: �—. 1) Size: The portion of the right-of-way adjacent to Olympic View Drive z and the unopened portion of 184th Street Southwest is approximately 7,304 square feet. The proposed 60-foot wide right-of-way designation between Olympic View Drive and 80th Avenue West is approximately 33,000 square feet (see Exhibit A, Attachment 4). f 2) Zoning: The zoning of the subject property is Single -Family Residential (RS-12). 3) Terrain and Vegetation: The subject property has several steep slopes, with all open areas vegetated (see Exhibit A, Attachments 4 and 5). 0 2. Neighboring Development And Zoning: a. Facts: 1) North: Developed with detached single family residences, and zoned RS-12. t 2) South: Developed with detached single family residences, and zoned RS-12. 3) East: Developed with detached single family residences, and zoned RS- 12. 4) West: Developed with a U.S. Post Office development and zoned Neighborhood Business (BN). 0 KA Hearing Examiner Recommendation Case No. ST 96-77 Page 5 b. Conclusion: The proposed development would be consistent with the surrounding zoning and development. B. STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICIES ACT (SEPA) a. Fact: The application is not exempt from SEPA pursuant to WAC 197-11- 800(6)b. A Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) was issued by the City of Edmonds SEPA Responsible Official on June 6,1996. The Environmental Checklist and Determination are included as Exhibit A, Attachments 2 and 3. b. Conclusion: The applicant and the City have satisfied the requirements of SEPA. 2. Compliance with requirement for a Street Map Amendment ECDC Chapter 20.65, states the review criteria for Street Map Amendment Changes. These Criteria include: 1) conformance with the purposes of the City's Comprehensive Plan; 2) conformance with the purposes of the Comprehensive Street Plan; and 3) conformance with the purposes of the Official Street Map. a. Facts: ECDC Section 15.05 is the City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan. The plan states in part, 'The Comprehensive Plan shall be consulted as a preliminary to the establishment, improvement, abandonment, or vacation of any street, and no dedication of any street or other area for public use shall be accepted by the city council until the location, character, extent, and effect thereof shall have been considered by the Hearing Examiner with reference to the Comprehensive Plan. The Hearing Examiner's Report on the same will be at the time and part of his or her action on the vacation andlor dedication". The applicant has not provided in his submittal any discussion of his proposal as it relates to the criteria for a Street Map Amendment. A summary of the proposed Street Map Amendment as it relates purposes of the Comprehensive Plan follows: 1) To serve as the basis for municipal policy on development and to provide guiding principles and objectives for the development of regulations. Hearing Examiner Comments: The proposed Street Map Amendment, as recommended below, will not adversely affect the ability of the City to utilize the Comprehensive Plan for guidance in the establishment of development regulations. 2) To promote the public health, safety, morals, order, convenience, prosperity and the general welfare. Hearing Examiner Comments: Removal of the right-of-way adjacent to Olympic View Drive would significantly impair the City's ability to protect the street from slope failure and development which might affect the slope. The proposed removal from the Official Street Map W of the unopened right-of-way lying west of the proposed plat road as a possible extension of 184"' Street S.W. will adversely affect the public z !I = health, safety, morals, order, convenience, prosperity and general z — W welfare. r� 3) To anticipate and influence the orderly and coordinated development of land and building use of the city and its environs, and conserve and a .,:n w restore natural beauty and other natural resources. L o Hearing Examiner Comments: The proposal appears to be consistent W and coordinated with development in the immediate vicinity if approved as recommended. 4) To encourage coordinated development and discourage piecemeal, spot Ln a' UJ or strip zoning and inharmonious subdividing. Z N Hearing Examiner Comments: The proposal, as recommended below, Z o appears to be coordinated with adjacent development and anticipates LU 2 : the eventual subdividing of the property in a manner that appears to v Q; be harmonious with the surrounding development. o —�' o 5) To facilitate adequate provisions for public services such as transportation, police and fire protection, water supply, sewage W o`. treatment, and parks. ui N'. Hearin Examiner Comments. The unopened 184th Street Southwest g P U s right-of-way lying east of the conceptual plat can be vacated provided za utility easement is retained. If the proposal is approved as recommended, public services should not be adversely affected by this proposal. b. Facts: ECDC Section 15.40 Comprehensive Street Plan states, "The Comprehensive Street Plan shall have the following purposes, in addition to the general purpose of the comprehensive plan: A. To provide for adoption and enforcement of street and thoroughfare maps and coordinated plan including the offlcial street map to implement © the comprehensive plan. B. To facilitate the provision of utilities and transportation. (Ord. 3030 § 3,19951." The following plans have been repealed: Comprehensive thoroughfare plan t ®i and the Changes to the plan. A summary of the proposed Street Map Amendment as it relates purposes of the Comprehensive Street Plan follows: 1) To provide for adoption and enforcement of street and thoroughfare maps and coordinated plan including the official street map to implement the comprehensive plan. Hearing Examiner Recommendation Case No. ST 96-77 Page 7 Hearing Examiner Comments: The Street and Thoroughfare plans have been repealed. If the conditions as outlined in the recommendations are followed The Official Street Map will continue to provide an effective means of implementing City policy with regard to the development of streets in the vicinity of the proposal. 2) To facilitate the provision of utilities and transportation. [Ord. 3030 § 3,19951. U) LL' Hearing Examiner Comments: Utilities and transportation in the LU 01 immediate vicinity should not be impaired by the proposal if the recommendations are followed. � �' c. Fact: ECDC Section 18.50 Official Street Map states, "The purpose of UV this chapter is to: Z F- �- o A. Implement the comprehensive street plan. z ww � o B. Regulate the construction o improvements which couldprevent the S .f � p p U cn' o N- implementation of the comprehensive street plan." _LUA summary of the proposed Street Map Amendment as it relates purposes �! _ o. of the Official Street Map follows: z w (n; 1) Implement the comprehensive street plan. U_ Hearing Examiner Comments: If the conditions as outlined in the z recommendations are followed, the proposal will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan 2) Regulate the construction of improvements which could prevent the implementation of the comprehensive street plan. t j Hearing Examiner Comments: Section 2.b above discusses ---_ conformance with the Comprehensive Street Plan. It does not appear that the proposal, as conditioned will prevent the implementation of the comprehensive street plan. 0 d) Conclusions: 1) Part of the proposal generally appears to be consistent with the purposes of the Comprehensive Plan. a. The unopened 184th Street Southwest right-of-way lying east of the conceptual plat can be vacated, however a utility t ® easement needs to be retained. b. The proposal, for removal of the proposed 60 foot right-of- way, generally appears to be consistent with the purposes of the Comprehensive Street Plan. However, it appears that the conditions as recommended in this report are necessary to satisfy the purposes of the Comprehensive Street Plan. UJ J C.i Uo cn 0 LU Luz J F- : u) LL I LU ., LL �) LLJ. z H 1.-o ww c� cn LULU, LLa z U ar z M X9 Hearing Examiner Recommendation Case No. ST 96-77 Page 8 2) In order to protect the slopes along Olympic View Drive, the right-of- way adjacent to that street should not be removed from the Official Street Map. 3) The proposal to eliminate the 20 foot wide 1841s Street Southeast right- of-way extension west of the property plat road appears to be inconsistent with the purposes of the Official Street Map. Lot 11 is adjacent to the west of the subject property has the potential to be subdivided and that subdivision would be served by the 180 St. S.W. extension. There also appears to be a significant need for a roadway connection from 80's Avenue West to Olympic View Drive which could provided in the future if the right-of-way to the west of the proposed plat road is relocated and expanded. The applicant has not shown that the entire proposal will meet the criteria of Street Map Amendment. However, if the conditions as outlined below are followed, then a portion of the proposal will be consistent with the criteria, C- TECHNICAL COMMITTEE 1. Review by City Departments: a. Fact: The Engineering Division had the following recommendations: Approval for removal from the Official Street Map the proposed right-of- way between Olympic View Drive and 80th Avenue West. Approval for the removal from the Official Street Map the unopened 184th Streets Southwest right-of-way lying east of the proposed plat road, provided that a utility easement is retained. Approval for removal from the Official Street Map the unopened right-of-way lying west of the proposed plat road, provided the plat road is made public and there is a pedestrian/bike access easement and construction between the proposed plat road and the westerly boundary of the conceptual plat. Denial for removal from the Official Street Map the right-of-way adjacent Olympic View Drive (see Exhibit A, Attachment 6). b. Fact: The Parks & Recreation Department had the following recommendations: Approval with exception of the unopened right-of-way lying west of the conceptual plat unless a pedestrian/bike access easement is provided between the proposed plat road and the westerly boundary of the conceptual plat (see Exhibit A, Attachment 7). c. Fact: The Public Works Department had the following comments and recommendations: A 24-inch water main and a sewer main is located in the right-of-way proposed to be removed from the Official Street Map. At a minimum the Public Works Department recommends that a 10-foot wide easement be required for all locations where City utility lines are located (see Exhibit A, Attachment 8). Hearing Examiner Recommendation Case No. ST 96-77 Page 9 D. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN {ECDC} ¢ 4� z �'-, 1. Compliance with Comprehensive Plan LU` a. Fact: The subject property is designated as "Single Family Large Lot". b. Conclusion: The conceptual development is consistent with the existing o'! Comprehensive Plan Land Use designation for the site. U) LUr, c. Facts: The Comprehensive Plan, Residential Development section, cn o identifies goals and policies which relate to "Residential Development" in UJ 0 the City. Specific goals and policies are discussed in detail below. 1) Section B states as a goal of the City that: "High quality residentialU. c Ln d development which is appropriate to the diverse lifestyle of Edmonds hw ° z: residents should be maintained and promoted...: ' ~' d) Conclusion: The conceptual development is consistent with the above P P w adopted goals and policies of the City for the development of residential W j'.` property in the City. e) Facts: The Comprehensive Plan, Soils and Topography section, identifies R a ~� w goals and polices which are related to this conceptual development. z U.U, f Specific applicable goals and polices are discussed in detail below. t-- gi `" zj 1) Section C states as a goal of the City that: "Development on steep w cn' U1 slopes or hazardous soil conditions should preserve the natural features of the site, in accordance with the following policies: z C.l.a. Grading, filling and tree cutting shall be restricted to building pads, driveways, access ways and other impervious surfaces. i C.l.b. Grading shall not jeopardize the stability of any slope of an adjacent property." -.--.-J C.1.c. Only minimal amounts of cut and fill on hillsides exceeding 15% slope should be permitted so that the natural topography can be preserved. Fill shall not be © used to create a yard on steeply sloped property." f) Conclusion: A portion of the proposed Street Map Amendment is consistent with the above adopted goals and policies of the City providing the recommendations outlined below are followed. E� O N" w -J U) L, —o LLJ ti Q cn d. =w r zF h0 z ~ w? �a a U t!) o�- LU = U r� u. p —z ui Cr or z W Hearing Examiner Recommendation Case No. ST 96-77 Page 10 r RECOMMENDATION: Based upon the foregoing findings and conclusions, the following is recommended: 1. Approval for removal from the Official Street Map the proposed 60 foot right-of-way between Olympic View Drive and 80th Avenue West (see Exhibit A, Attachment 5). 2. Approval for the removal from the Official Street Map the unopened extension 184th Street Southwest 20 foot right-of-way lying east of the proposed plat road, provided that a utility easement is retained (see Exhibit A, Attachment 5). 3. Denial of removal from the Official Street Map the unopened extension of the 184th Street Southwest right-of-way lying west of the proposed plat road. Rather, when the subject property is platted, that section of right-of-way shall be widened and relocated to accommodate a future 184!` Street Southwest street extension between the unopened right-of-way south of Lot 11 and the future plat road. 4. Denial of removal from the Official Street Map the right-of-way adjacent to Olympic View Drive. 5. This application is subject to the applicable requirements contained in the Edmonds Community Development Code. It is the responsibility of the applicant to ensure compliance with the various provisions contained in these ordinances. 6. The approval as noted above is transferable. Entered this 26th day of July, 1996, 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 RECONSIDERATION AND COUNCIL ACTION: The following is a summary of the deadlines and procedures for filing reconsiderations and appeals. Any person wishing to file or respond to a recommendation or appeal should contact the Planning Department for further procedural information. A. 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 t 0 Z U O 0 LU s J : L. D� T W z F- �-O z F w L �o (n o �} = Lt F-h �- a z w( U_ o ~�z tin Hearing Examiner Recommendation Case No. ST 96-77 Page 11 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. B. CITY COUNCIL. ACTION: 1. Normal Review. The City Council will consider a recommendation of the Hearing Examiner at its next available meeting. The Council may adopt or remand the recommendation at that meeting. 2. Optional Public Hearing. If the Council wishes to consider any change to the recommendation, the Council shall set a public hearing in the manner provided in Chapter 20.90. After the hearing the Council shall approve, modify, conditionally approve, deny or remand the proposal. EXHIBITS: The following exhibits were offered and entered into the record. A. Planning Division Advisory Report, with 8 attachments B. Letter from Joe Scialdone, dated 7/7/96 and signed by 39 other persons C. Map of proposed road alignment, submitted by Joe Scialdone PARTIES of RECORD: Charles Maki 8235 Talbot Road Edmonds, WA 98026 John Mellor 606 Sater Lane Edmonds, WA 98026 Jim Thompson 18305 8& Avenue West Edmonds, WA 98026 Ed Swanson 8111 182°d S.W. Edmonds, WA 98026 Han Z. and Regina K. Park. 7704 Olympic View Drive Edmonds, WA 98026 Joe Scialdone 18332 80`h Avenue West Edmonds, WA 98026 Earl Smith 18325 80'h West Edmonds, WA 98026 Katherine Morley 18203 80`h Avenue West Edmonds, WA 98026 Francis La Fond Planning Division 18227 8e Avenue West Engineering Division Edmonds, WA 98026 Fire Department Parks Department Public Works Department _® F f— w Uo U)W cn O w LL _: z f- E- o ww � p 0-1 Fl �i-o —z U S o ~' z CITY OF EDMONDS 250 5TH AVENUE NORTH, EDMONDS, WA 98020 PLANNING DIVISION ADVISORY REPORT FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS To: Ron McConnell, Hearing Examiner From: �`"'"1L � U.c« KirkVinish Planner Date: JULY 3,1996 File: ST-96-77 CHARLES MAKI Hearing Date, Time, And Place: July 12,_ 1996 At 9:00 AM, Community Services Conference Room 250 5th Avenue North TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page I. INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................2 A. Application......................................................................................................................2 B. Recommendations...........................................................................................................2 11. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS..........................................................................3 A. Site Description .........................................................................................................3 B. State Environmental Policies Act (SEPA)......................................................................3 C. Technical Committee......................................................................................................6 D. Comprehensive Plan (ECDC).........................................................................................6 III. RECONSIDERATIONS AND APPEALS................................................................................7 A. Request for Reconsideration...........................................................................................7 B. Appeals............................................................................................................................7 IV. LAPSE OF APPROVAL .................................................. :........................................................ 7 V. NOTICE TO COUNTY ASSESSOR.........................................................................................7 VI. APPENDICES...........................................................................................................................8 VII. PARTIES OF RECORD............................................................ ............... . ........................ :.....8 t Charles Maki File No. ST-96-77 Page 2 of 8 i I. INTRODUCTION A. Application 1. Applican Charles Maki (see Attachment 1). 2. Site Location: 7704 Olympic View Drive (see Attachments 1 and 4). 3. Regpes : Application to amend the City's Official Street Map to remove that portion of I proposed 60-foot wide right-of-way designation between Olympic View Drive and 80th Avenue West starting just north of 184th Street Southwest. Additionally the applicant request to remove the designation of the existing 20-foot wide right-of-way of 184th Street Southwest starting at Olympic View Drive and proceeding west approximately 253 feet; remove the designation of a portion of the unused right-of-way lying west of Olympic View Drive and north of 184th Street Southwest right-of-way, to allow a vacation of the subject right-of-way pursuant to an applicationsubmitted under City of Edmonds Planning Division File No. ST- 96-78 (see Attachment 1). 4. Review Process: Street Map Amendment; Hearing Examiner conducts public hearing and makes recommendation to the City Council._ 5. Mgjor Issues: a. Compliance with Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Section 20.65 (STREET MAP CHANGES). b. Compliance with Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Chapter 15.05 (COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - PURPOSES). c. Compliance with Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Chapter 15.40 (COMPREHENSIVE STREET PLAN - PURPOSES). d. Compliance with Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Chapter 18.50 (OFFICIAL STREET MAP). B. Recommendations Based on statements of Fact, Conclusions, and Attachments in this report we recommend partial Approval of this application subject to the following conditions: 1. Approval for removal from the Official Street Map the proposed right-of-way between Olympic View Drive and 80th Avenue West (see Attachment 5). 2. Approval for the removal from the Official Street Map the unopened extension 184th Street Southwest right-of-way lying east of the proposed plat road, provided that a utility easement is retained (see Attachment 5). 3. Approval for removal from the Official Street Map the unopened extension of the 184th Street Southwest right-of-way lying west of the proposed plat road, provided the plat road is made public and there is a pedestrian/bike access easement and construction between the proposed plat road and the westerly boundary of the proposed plat (see Attachment 5). 4. Denial for removal from the Official Street Map the right-of-way adjacent to Olympic View Drive. 5. This application is subject to the applicable requirements contained in the Edmonds Community Development Code. It is the responsibility of the applicant to ensure compliance with the various provisions contained in these ordinances. 6. The permit should be transferable. C Z- UJ < JJ 0 LU LU _J V) 0 LU n � R _J LL SQ C) r LU E Z: Zr �- 0 Z l­- LU LU n L) (n off LU LL C LU (r, 0 Z to Charles Maki File No. ST-96-77 Page 3 of& II. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS A. Site Description 1. Site Development And Zoning: a) Facts. (1) Sim: The portion of the right-of-way adjacent to Olympic View Drive and the unopened portion of 184th Street Southwest is approximately 7,304 square feet. The proposed 60-foot wide right-of-way designation between Olympic View Drive and 80th Avenue West is approximately 33,000 square feet (see Attachment 4). (2) Zonin : The zoning of the subject property is Single -Family Residential (RS-12). (3) Terrain and Vegetation: The subject property has several steep slopes, with all open areas vegetated (see Attachments 4 and 5). 2. Neighboring Development And Zoning: (1) Nsilh: Developed with detached single family residences, and zoned RS-12. (2) South: Developed with detached single family residences, and zoned RS- 12. (3) East: Developed with detached single family residences, and zoned RS- 12. (4) -W&9: Developed with a U.S. Post Office development and zoned Neighborhood Business (BN). b) Conclusion: The proposed development would be consistent with the surrounding zoning and development, B. State Environmental Policies Act (SEPA) a) FAd: The application is not exempt from SEPA pursuant to WAC 197-11-800(6)b. A Determination ofNonsignificance (DNS) was issued by the City of Edmonds SEPA Responsible Official on June 6, 1996. The Environmental Checklist and Determination are included as Attachments 2 and 3. b) Conclusion: The applicant and the City have satisfied the requirements of SEPA. 2. Compliance with requirement for a Street Map Amendment ECDC Chapter 20.65, states the review criteria for Street Map Amendment Changes. These Criteria include: 1) conformance with the purposes of the City's Comprehensive Plan; 2) conformance with the purposes of the Comprehensive Street Plan; and 3) conformance with the purposes of the Official Street Map. a) Facts: ECDC Section 15.05 is the City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan. The plan states in part, "The Comprehensive Plan shall be consulted as a preliminary to the establishment, improvement, abandonment, or vacation of any street, and no dedication of any street or other area for public use shall be accepted by the city council until the location, character, went, and effect thereof shall have been considered by the Hearing Examiner with reference to the Comprehensive Plan. The Hearing Examiner's Report on the same will be at the time and part of his or her action on the vacation andlor dedication". The applicant has not provided in his submittal any discussion of his proposal as it relates to the criteria for a Street Map Amendment. A summary of the ST96-77.DOC July 3, 1996 Staff Report 0 0 Charles Maki File No. ST-96-77 Page 4 of 8 proposed Street Map Amendment as it relates purposes of the Comprehensive Plan follows: (1) To serve as the basis for municipal policy on development and to provide guiding principles and objectives for the development of regulations. Staff Comments: The proposed Street Map Amendment will not adversely affect the ability of the City to utilize the Comprehensive Plan for guidance in the establishment of development regulations (2) To promote the public health, safety, morals, order, convenience, prosperity and the general welfare. Staff Comments: Removal of the right-of-way adjacent to Olympic View Drive would significantly impair the City 's ability to protect the street from slope failure and development which might affect the slope. The proposed removal from the Official Street Map of the proposed right-of-way between Olympic View Drive and 80th Avenue West and the unopened right-of-way lying west of the proposed plat road will not adversely affect the public health, safety, morals, order, convenience, prosperity and general welfare, providing a pedestrian/bike access easement between the proposedplat road the the westerely boundary of the proposed plat. (3) To anticipate and influence the orderly and coordinated development of land and building use of the city and its environs, and conserve and restore natural beauty and other natural resources. Staff Comments: The proposal appears to be consistent and coordinated with development in the immediate vicinity if the conditions as recommed are applied. (4) To encourage coordinated development and discourage piecemeal, spot or strip zoning and inharmonious subdividing. Staff Comments: The proposal appears to be coordinated with adjacent development and anticipates the eventual subdividing of the property in a manner that appears to be harmonious with the surrounding development. To facilitate adequate provisions for public services such as transportation, police and tire protection, water supply, sewage treatment, and parks. Staff Comments: The unopened 184th Street Southwest fight -of -way lying east of the conceptual plat can be vacated provided a utility easement is retained. If the proposal is conditioned as recommended, public services should not be adversely affected by this proposal. b) FACk: ECDC Section ISAO Comprehensive Street Plan states, "The Comprehensive Street Plan shall have the following purposes, in addition to the general purpose of the comprehensive plan: A. To provide for adoption and enforcement of street and thoroughfare maps and coordinated plan including the official street map to implement the comprehensive plan. B. To facilitate the provision of utilities and transportation. [Ord. 3030 § 3, 19951. " The following plans have been repealed: Comprehensive thoroughfare plan and the Changes to the plan. A summary of the proposed Street Map Amendment as it relates purposes of the Comprehensive Street Plan follows: ST96-77DOC /July 3,19961 Staff Report 101 Charles Maki File No: ST-96-77 Page 5 of 8 (1) , To provide for adoption and enforcement of street and thoroughfare maps and coordinated plan including the official street map to implement the comprehensive plan, z ji Staff Comments: The Street and Thoroughfare plans have been repeated If the Z.- sZ' conditions as outlined in the recommendations are followed The Official Street Map w will continue to provide an effective means of implementing City policy with regard Q to the development of streets in the vicinity of the proposal. wV J (2) To facilitate the provision of utilities and transportation. lord. 3030 § 3,19951. o , w= Staff Comments: Utilities and transportation in the immediate vicinity should not be -J I— impaired by the proposal if the conditions as outlined in the recommendations are - O' followed. w r i c) ,fit: ECDC Section 18.50 Official Street Map states, "7he purpose of this chapter is to: � 3 1: c7. A. Implement the comprehensive street plan. _ t - B. Regulate the construction of improvements which could prevent the implementation of z the comprehensive street plan." ZL w ? A summary of the proposed Street Map Amendment as it relates purposes of the Official a Street Map follows: o —p o F; (1) Implement the comprehensive street plan, = Staff Comments: If the conditions as outlined in the recommendations are followed, U{ the proposal will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan u- _ z (2) Regulate the construction of improvements which could prevent the i to v z implementation of the comprehensive street plan. O I { Staff Comments: Section 11.2.b above discusses conformance with the z t Comprehensive Street Plan. It does not appear that the proposal, as conditioned will prevent the implementation of the comprehensive street plan. d) Conclusions: (1) The proposal generally appears to be consistent with the purposes of the Comprehensive Plan. However, in order to protect the slopes along Olympic View i Drive, the right-of-way adjacent to that street should not be removed from the Official Street Map. Additionally, the unopened 184th Street Southwest right-of- way lying east of the conceptual plat can be vacated, however a utility easement 1. needs to be retained. © (2) The proposal generally appears to be consistent with the purposes of the Comprehensive Street Plan. However, it appears that the conditions as recommended in Section I.B of this report are necessary to satisfy the purposes of the Comprehensive Street Plan. (3) The proposal appears to be consistent with the purposes of the Official Street Map, if a pedestrian/bike access easement between the proposed road and the westerly boundary of the conceptual plat is provided. t © The applicant has not shown that the proposal will meet the criteria of Street Map Amendment. However, if the conditions as outlined Section B of this report are followed then the proposal will be consistent with the criteria. 1*1 W ST96-77,DOC i July 3,19961 Staff Report EN Technical Committee 1. Review by City Departments: a) EM: The Engineering Division had the following recommendations: Approval for removal from the Official Street Map the proposed right-of-way between Olympic View Drive and 80th Avenue West. Approval for the removal from the Official Street Map the unopened 184th Street Southwest right-of-way lying east of the proposed plat road, provided that a utility easement is retained. Approval for removal from the Official Street Map the unopened right-of-way lying west of the proposed plat road, provided the plat road is made public and there is a pedestrian/bike access easement and construction between the proposed plat road and the westerly boundary of the conceptual plat. Denial for removal from the Official Street Map the right-of-way adjacent Olympic View Drive (see Attachment 6). b) fast: The Parks & Recreation Department had the following recommendations: Approval with exception of the unopened right-of-way lying west of the conceptual plat unless a pedestrian/bike access easement is provided between the proposed plat road and the westerly boundary of the conceptual plat (see Attachment 7). c) fit: The Public Works Department had the following comments and recommendations: A 24-inch water main and a sewer main is located in the right-of-way proposed to be removed from the Official Street Map. At a minimum the Public Works Department recommends that a 10-foot wide easement be required for all locations where City utility lines are located (see Attachmeni 8). , Comprehensive Plan (ECDC) I. Compliance with Comprehensive Plan a) EM: The subject property is designated as "Single Family Large Lot". b) Conclusion: The conceptual development is consistent with the existing Comprehensive Plan Land Use designation for the site. c) Facts: The Comprehensive Plan, Residential Development section, identifies goals and policies which relate to "Residential Development" 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 lifestyle of Edmonds residents should be maintained and promoted...." d) Conclusion: The conceptual development is consistent with the above adopted goals and policies of the City for the development of residential property in the City. e) Facts: The Comprehensive Plan, Soils and Topography section, identifies goals and polices which are related to this conceptual development. Specific applicable goals and polices are discussed in detail below. (1) Section C states as a goal of the City that: "Development on steep slopes or hazardous soil conditions should preserve the natural features of the site, in accordance with the following policies: (i) C.l.a. Grading, filling and tree cutting shall be restricted to building pads, driveways, access ways and other impervious surfaces. Charles Maki File No. ST-96-77 Page 7 of 8 (ii) C.l.b. Grading shall not jeopardize the stability of any slope of an adjacent property." (iii) C.1.c, Only minimal amounts of cut and fill on hillsides exceeding 15 % slope should be permitted so that the natural topography can be preserved. Fill shall not be used to create a yard on steeply sloped property." f) Conclusion: The proposed Street Map Amendment is consistent with the above adopted goals and policies of the City providing the recommendations at outlined in Section B of this report are followed. III. RECONSIDERATIONS AND APPEALS 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 further procedural information. A. 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. B. Appeals 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 the project and the date of the decision, the name of the individual or group appealing the decision, their interest in the matter, 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. IV. LAPSE OF APPROVAL Section 20.05.020.0 states 'Unless the owner obtains a building permit, or if no building is required, substantially commences the use allowed within one year from the date of approval, the conditional use permit shall expire and be null and void, unless the owner files an application for an extension of the time before the expiration date.' V. NOTICE TO COUNTY ASSESSOR The property owner may as a result of the decision rendered by the Hearing Examiner request a change in the valuation of the property by the Snohomish County Assessors Office. C z z, LU wU "i O Uo V)w ED -1 F=- Ln t; w cc w < �a zW Z F- F-O F- wj �Q t� cn o— oF- wW La _Z LU O~ z 4. ❑s L0 city of 6 `i,aonds � land use application ❑ ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD ❑ COMP PLAN AMENDMENT ❑ CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ❑ HOME OCCUPATION ❑ FORMAL SUBDIVISION ❑ SHORT SUBDIVISION ❑ LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT ❑ PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOP ENT ❑ OF MENT STREET VACATION ❑ REZONE ❑ SHORELINE PERMIT ❑ VARIANCE / REASONABLE USE EXCEPTION ❑ OTHER FILE # `it, 71 ONE - DATE _ � 3`' ''6 �S/ 2 REC'D BY FEE �. 70 RECEIPT#Pt HEARING D TE (l HE ❑ STAFF ❑ PB ❑ ADB CC ACTION TAKEN: ❑ APPROVED ❑ DENIED ❑ APPEALED APPEAL# Applicant C><.m,-fie Phone ?76--,�.¢-/ Address 62;25 %0 A&74 jiiv..a.wv w oc 9 86 Z r- Property Address or Location 770 4. 01 •„ , c. ✓,- ,`,, .L ."vc, /„�o �� WA 98oz4 Property Owner f-/&h Z. /��, n4 !G t%r �c Phone 77-¢- — o / 3 9 Address 770.4. U/ w, ,c. yic.w G7r,iles Ec%v»o Ka/7 W.4 . 98oZ Agent 4 W . Me lie Y- Phone 77.5'- -7 Address G o G �a v �ti 6/, e s WA qc6 o 2 C> Tax Acc # 37C& - 06 — eae, 9 — 0 00 8 Sec. / 8 TwP. gZti! Rng. 4F- Lega1 Description ,�T-7-,q����, Details of Project or Proposed Usi12 e s r 7"u ct !ly uses-r% M __ Af r O'� e-/ . DG+.'/' 7s:W tAecf oG? lrX t7c`3/ cS 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 fumished 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 r.it%t of +� enter the subject property for the purpose of inspection and posting attendant to th CITY OF EDMONDS iENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 89 LU;• Purpose of Checklist. QThe State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), chapter 43.21C RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the w = environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An environmental impact statement (EIS) must be prepared for all � t— proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide LU u. t information to help you and the agency identify P Y proposal ( p proposal, w O � P Y g Y � fy impacts from our ro sal and to reduce or avoid impacts from the ro osal, if it 2 ? can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. U. } Instructions for Applicants. =UJ; t; This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Governmental agencies use this " 2 checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an ETS. Answer Z t—the questions briefly, with the most precise information kpown, or give the best description you can. t— 0.. w w' You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to 0' answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not know" or does not apply". complete answers to the O questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. � ~ i ' S V Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer these questions F if you can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can assist you. _O Z The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels U N, of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which P you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining Z if there may be significant adverse impact. Use of checklist far nonproject proposals. Complete this checklist for nonproject proposals, even though questions may be answered "does not apply." IN ADDITION, complete the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (part D). S For nonproject actions, the references in the checklist to the words "project,* "a licant " and " « jpp property or site should be read as J "proposer," and "affected geographic area," respectively. A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: _�tJjA 2. Name of applicant: to 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: 4. Date checklist prepared: Page t of22 CHM/10.3-91MAWER ATTACHMENT 2 File No. ST-96-77 t ��, 0 MAI 7. 8. 9. (STAFF COMMENTS) Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. / _7'A' O",gtsQ 5*ne (STAFF COMMENTS) List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. (STAFF COMMENTS) Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. Alo (STAFF COMMENTS)_ _- 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. rto,,,—e o qL cwarn0.254 .MAsrea (STAFF COMMENTS) Page 2 of 22 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. / 24 r�rLt— i3 vve-acle� rfrs&--,7%/ La- ya,—c .`ice N /�Gtr 7'°is�s t/ �..7La v car 6w 7�c.� e ec�rr m ,om s--T e W7-/ e >,e22 f-,010i1 1-1/ t,41 s4 Va.c_a..�rovc p.roce.s3 (STAFF COMMENTS) 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. a vt o �-7e,��-A�44- 14/8 t'—2% A% /�T¢ �`t!• M—co-Z/o-ev c 16 a41 1� 1/7 (STAFF COMMENTS) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT &f a'- o v 7"4. a H su u-s `7 o t4Q 7,,) •e i �41 a w s ca t� C, r E /e tto t , -� o yr I., T PA- s.e& B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS , L 1. Earth a. General description of the site (circle one): Flat,/rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other: r•e h //ea-a-/f sro /f n ri cv Y/`� �la. A a v 7 i o" S .d A*t- y " �or77oN o � ��-g-So �'s�oJ2C.T (STAFF COMMENTS) b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? r3D o� X9 (STAFF COMMENTS) s C. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you knout the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. , Page 3 of23 CHUT1100.7193.14AWER Ea® s P e: ee+tt z5"fruer�o y'P �vJvo�cs . � (STAFF COMMENTS) Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? ff so, describe. r�(Ih (STAFF COMMENTS) Describe the purpose, type and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. (STAFF COMMENTS) f. CouId erosion occur as it result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. (STAFF COMMENTS) g. About what percent of the site will. be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? ,.., s 2 -/ (STAFF COMMENTS) CW LTlt00.1-91MAnER Page 4 of22 im © h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: 5 '4&--l—&-d m e7 o d 0-17'" a c-u 6 e, d-ve e- crwA-11 `k 4.e. 2. AIR a. 3. (STAFF COMMENTS) What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. _ °--e-(f .3 a a-y, .,o 4-0.Lcl b. Are there any off -site sources of emissions or odor that may effect your proposal? If so, generally (STAFF COMMENTS) C. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to the, if any: /tic r1._2_ (STAFF COMMENTS) WATER a. Surface: (1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? * If yes, describe type and provide names. Ifropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. 7/_ A 7C IS AFF COM119ENTS) Page S of 22 cwccrna:s ss.r ASM U) w W H! 0 _' z ►- �-o z w w! O o; o = U' ~F LLO z Uy o� z t oil (2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attachavailable plans. (STAFF COMMENTS) (3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. -&IA (STAFF COMMENTS) (4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. t o I (STAFF COMMENTS) (5) Does the proposal lie within a 100 year floodplain? If so, note location on'the site plan. (STAFF COMMENTS) (6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. Pagt 6 of 22 b. Ground: (1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. (STAFF COAMENTS) (2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any. (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals...; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. (STAFF COMMENTS) C. Water Runoff (including storm water): (1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into otherwaters? If so, describe. F�7Y Pktr A- Pi 7T i - rS 'fn vs �t rs a yLhYa ✓Yd PY G►7/s�� �G( -""c' �A-'r'S�e � � e � �n, e t ���c�•GrX , si ,cap ,-r7`"a.rn..�vi,+sas( rc .Zo ., •" i s , .� / ..� c(z�a e-d a. /, .s .e-i 7Lo GX!oT! r_S7`Dt�wx rccHwY .3� sTe�n ?4e lyf+J�lL fC-CJ .�✓fv G. (STAFF COMMNTS) (2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. e (STAFF COAMENTS) Page 7 of 22 CHMMO•25.91MASTER - � a It S w' z� t- O' z wU �o C3 (n, LI = U W 0 - z w tA' t) 2 a~ z M p d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: yti tovYL2.__A-6 4I.-PV.Yt4G'A0, G,(J y 1 (STAFF COMMENTS) 4. Plants a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other; ✓ evergreen tree: fir, cedar; pine, others shrubs _gam pasture crop or grain wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bulrush, skunk cabbage, other: water plants: water lily, eelgraw, milfoil, other. other types of vegetation: (STAFF COMMENTS) b. What kind and amount of vegetation will he removed or altered". (STAFF COMMENTS) C. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. AL , Ac. (STAFF COMMENTS) d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other materials to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: Page s or 22 CHKLi110.2S43.MA.WER - ,mil (STAFF COMMENTS) 5. Animals a. Check or circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: birds: hawk, heron, eagle, son hirds other: mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: (STAFF COMMENTS) b. List Any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. (STAFF COMMENTS) C. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. (STAFF COMMENTS) d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance /wildlife, if any: (STAFF COMMENTS) 6. Energy and Natural Resources Page 9 of 22 F CHKL7110-2$-93.MASPER C:T C a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. --d,J km o w n, «.4 f4c -f 7i svc.e— ty caVp Zr X. 64.p.3 .ce-%c /07I -, d.az&j / li�-r/a.. „r s/ea r 0 M.i cs../ /� i�tl zle 1X eiG ✓' / .M e�J i n d� e/ �r%w�f /Z a eys.� S S Z' W w v. (STAFF COMMENTS) JO U 0, U W` to L! b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally LU cn u.. describe. Alo y' Z E— �o w ua' (STAFF COMMENTS) U cn a WC. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other z U; proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: z tiI Ni 1— H O Z - (STAFF COMMENTS) __...� 7. Environmental Health y a. Are there any environmental health hayairds, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or haya►rdous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so describe. ® �o (STAFF COMMENTS) Page 10 of 22 CHK T1M25M.MASTER w _J US LL W Oi LL Q{(i Ln d 3 FS LU; Z I-- o. z w W' v m! 0 �} W W{ H LLp Z VCn 0 Z to (1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. 41n V (STAFF COMMENTS) (2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: (STAFF COMMENTS) b. Noise (1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? -44 (STAFF COMMENTS) (2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. t`� Lea-c-'C �G r+•n - C o yr �7 7'�P rt�G 7`i a-v+.yi o i �4 scr� /r �.e� C,ar�.�.-6ja,�f ,�j V 49t7-4 r►rYt VlGlete J$ 114 bF �a vae A rc� 0%_e-6 t G�t�T' (ST'AFCOMMENTS) / (3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: a- H s LU^eL-- ,ti /2J 4.6a'4-e. (STAFF COMMENTS) Page it or22 CHM/10*5.91MASTHR MI (STAFF COMMENTS) b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. Jul a (STAFF COMMENTS) C. Describe Any structures on the site. ea H rs-(Ar c&.- I rt 8 a .: a.,6 6 Y -C- (STAFF COMMENTS) d. Will any structures be demolished? /If so, what? (STAFF COMMENTS) e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? 25-I2 c^WLT/10•23.93.MASM (STAFF COMMENTS) Pago 12of22 w -J p g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master plan designation of the site?. LU CJ3 Lim j LU ti <( (STAFF COMMENTS) sw Z t-- z O': h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. g O. . I , "...., ^- • 4 a, wrn-we✓ a �, 0- H. i/ c �e s3 i Y r o-II- �-s �'-- moo! v cn , f/� 6 17 70 •- S o -/ Wa e �t 1 s4 a '/o � O a �: i w U ; / . , n , -- ✓ / �`-e- S U; u- O (STAFF COMMENTS) Z: W (6 U S Z ~ i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? .., 30 f - J (STAFF COMN11ENTS) -- ` j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? (STAFF COMMENTS) t® Page 13 of22 CWLTJ1045.93.MAnER kf '""" x* y , RNMIt'A�nx' "r {/.;� ._ \ k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: z (� = Z'• (STAFF COMMENTS) t- w w �. v p o I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, cn if any: ME LUw AJA,&C..•G. 7n- Vke. T'2fa tiLL 0} �r�/�1�.�.�cs l�7 N0 42 456 Q-/( f8 �/ d"t?r+'7L7 A.- 2 l74 � ".rl to X/S¢ F4s7 4 Qh" .LAf/D +GGTc¢A �Gl..1-0 GfS•C—F N a (STAFF COMMENTS) ♦— W '' z 1-- _ 0 z 1- 9. Housing MI a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. fir "7 4- ? y., A/ r r ead �J i jrOiOctSa- (STAFF COMMENTS) b. Approximately how many units, if any would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low- income housing. / _TX.M, e 01'da...1 .t.au m e fl 8 a a 6at1-e. (STAFF COMMENTS) C. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: -/ - A to � — ,Ak - S '/—,r A (STAFF COMMENTS) Pap 14 of 22 cwu.T110-:5.93 MAsrsa (STAFF COMMENTS) . C. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: f _4cn,e (STAFF COMMENTS) 11. Light and Glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? _!l4 e-te (STAFF COMMENTS) b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? 414 i� (STAFF COMMENTS) CHKVrt10•2SM.M&w(M Page IS of 22 q � I (STAFF COMMENTS) ME z' F- u,. ¢� � , d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare: impacts, if any: ma wz U) u.wo- � LL ¢ =)I (STAFF COMMENTS) EEuj z 12. Recreation f- 0,, z LU LU' a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? (� tni Ei�Lt_st-ALL t 64•3 4oh .G. 4e �i T / �15 �� 0 y � 8 ! lJ/�f /J f G iir e-' LtdLU Z LL 0'' Uj U (STAFF COMMENTS) v= O� Z b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreation uses? If so, describe. (STAFF COMMENTS) C. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the pk ieect or applicant, if any: _ 1L1y T 5 / / e (STAFF COMMENTS) Page 16 of 22 CFO:LT114"J•98.MASTER '���.0 13. Historic and Cultural Preservation a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. 410 (STAFF COMMENTS) b. Generally describe any landmarks 6r evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. (STAFF COMMENTS) c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: (STAFF COM WENTS) 14. Transportation a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. / y� F�IyC`a3•G�pLt' E+e�rrcc+�J rZ'ea Su�jlC.e� aT_!/� 16 t (STAFF COMMENTS) b. Is site currently served by public transit? If no, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? ',/ 1�n. �m c,7syru �x s�y l rca —,a I -•r�es I f /cs[d /Lb'd-6 Qbc 4-_ Ve- rn p o, / C1 ECLT/10•]3.93. MASTER Page 17 of 22 -e-'d T (STAFF COMMENTS) C. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the nrni t Pu...;„�rory (STAFF COMMENTS) d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). .�•t 1 c �t / de- - ea a..c. Y o ova/ : s ,p.- n 6 s•e�% yt^ov f�rt�jS e. �' 1 Ti s a kV.'7 m 7G `TLi�s �Fs-rteia Ao-�►%.Qy �7` !f Ae �64,c o•o- ,n itva.7� . (STAFF COMMENTS) e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. IV o ca � - Z (STAFF COMMENTS) f f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when r•--- peak volumes would occur. GC3G'. b�Oy` �i/Lo� OLGL.y�.�V /GsiTia/. (STAFF COMMENTS) i® page is or22 CHMT/10-:3.91MASPER t0 b• Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: ti% ea--'iL 7'Zt � 3 lavl�t c„ (STAFF COMMENTS) 15. Public Services a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, healthcare, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. m v^ P A-c. ,e..e, l {D a a p/ a/y-71i a sa st i rT c A.�s c/6 /.. �l�'•Llf G2s (STAFF COMMENTS) b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any: (STAFF COMMENTS) 16. Utilities a. Cir currently available at the site electricity, tural g water efuse service telephon sanitary server, ptic system, other: — (STAFF COMMENTS) Page 19 of 22 CHKLT/1043199.MA57ER - . } O _•y.. ® t C j4 Z �"dl�Y,`J�,'Yh9 vSnyvS�x & Rf ;r,7xsai�''�ta.`S.�'��:vii��re��`. f a' r r - b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility :providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or i the immediate vicinity which might be needed. �+ T K aat.�+•rt� ct..7" t 5 IrLrt G-' (STAFF COMMENTS) C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead to make its decision. agency is relying on them Signature of Proponent Date Submitted 's V CHMT110-2543mmTER 0 J 0 1. U o cmn w: wz m LLI LU LL SLL z 1— i-- o z w u.1;. 2 Q` L.3 NT 2. w W�1 LL O z; ui to U= 0 F z i® 3. (do not use this sheet far project actFons) Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the list of the elements of the environment. When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the types of activities likely to result from the . proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms. How would the proposal be. likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; production, storage, or release of toxic or hayardous substances; or production of noise? Proposal measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: .ZIA How would the proposal he likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life? _N ZIA Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: Al 1A How would the proposal he likely to deplete energy or natural resources? Al Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: AJ XAr CWL7110.25.41.MASTER Page 21 of 22 r s® 4. How would the proposal he likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection, such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetl/ands, floodplains, or prime farmlands? Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: At A 5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? ,A Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: Rl® H 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? A . Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: 7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. N CHXLT/10.1S93.MAnBR Page 22 of 22 0 za CITY OF EDMONDS 250 STH AVENUE NORTH, EDMONDS, WA 98020 (2061771-0220 RCW 197-11-970 Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNMCANCE Description of proposal: Amend the City's official street map to remove that portion of proposed 60-foot wide right-of-way designation between Olympic View Drive and 80th Avenue West starting just north of 184th Street Southwest. Also the designation of the existing 20-foot wide right-of-way of 184th Street Southwest starting at Olympic View Drive and proceeding west approximately 253 feet shall be removed; and remove the designation of a portion of the unused right-of-way, to allow a vacation of the subject right's -of -way pursuant to an application submitted under City of Edmonds Planning Division File No. ST-96-78 (see File No. ST-96-77). Proponent: Charles Makie Location of proposal, including street address if any: 250 5th Avenue North Lead agency: CITY OF EDMONDS The lead agency for this proposal has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement is not required under RCW 43.21.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. There is no comment period for this DNS. X This DNS is issued under 197-11-340(2); the lead agency will not act on this proposal for 15 days from the date below. Comments must be submitted by hily 15. 1996. Responsible Official: Jeffrey S. Wilson Position/Title: Current Planning Supervisor, Department of Community Services - Planning Divisio n Phone: 771-0220 Address: City of Edmonds, 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds, WA 98020 Date: 6 / Z-W f 7G Signatures '`~--/� XX You may appeal this determination to Robert Chave, Planning Manager, at 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds, WA 98020, no later than July 15. 1996, by filing a written appeal citing the reasons. You should be prepared to make specific factual objections. Contact Jefty SSWilson to read or ask about the procedures for SEPA appeals. XX Posted on June 28. 1996, at the Edmonds Public Library, Edmonds Community Services Building, and the Edmonds Post Office. XX Distribute to "Checked" Agencies on the reverse side of this form, along with a copy of the Checklist. Page t of 2 ATTACHMENT 3 (YR){.nDNi(DATE).SEPA File No. ST-96-77 W wD a V O �O W -i t CnLLJ LL� o' t = W h = Z i- F- O Z ~ W W Od tJ (n A �t W LLj{ = U' hF- u- O �z iu vy' u _ 0M z C VicinitILEy Map SEAVIEW PARK t 1 -----_.-------'-- — — — — — — — — - j Mh AVENUE W. a _------ ----_ AVENUE W. i• 1 I IV 1 I E- W, \ I 1 I CC \ i I I I I '_ tR \ I I I o I i t uJ / I I 1 L) O' / �" 79th PLACE W. \ Lu w z I I$ s. v \ i I m 1 � i < ti Qj L_ __ -T -71 79th A44tUE W. Z. i Isi mp �/ �%L-- F-: I O O j 0 ~ / I \ c N ow+ 66 w ty m p ■ _ zi ---- ID M n l / J k$ i 1 N 1 r > I' o I i I 0 r 0 -t j> m 1 I ; > i 7c j-------- 1 __________ i 1 Q I tc v _-- AVEt- W.--- / ---------------d--..._...,, I � I t0 r T— — m I > --__-_-_� 11 /r________'___--"-'r _ Tg�AE �11 m + N PLANNED RESIDENTIAL PRELIMINARY SITE COMMUNITYfor /^. OWNER - DR. HAHN PARK OFFICIAL STREET ATTACHMENT 5 OLYMPIC MEW DRIVE WASHNGTON AMENDMENT EDMONDS mle`N& ST-96-77 n 0�. � Date: June 3, 1996 To: Planning Division From: Gordy Hyde, Engineering Coordinatorq* Subject: Street Map Amendment for Charley ftllaki (7704 Oiyr�pic—.' r%. V, (ST-96-77) The application has been reviewed by the Engineering Division. The application should be revised to reflect JbM requested actions (1) vacation of Olympic View Drive right-of-way, (2) revision of the street Map to remove the proposed right-of- way connecting OVD to 80th Ave. W., and (3) vacation of 184th St. S.W. right-of- way. The Division has the following requirements/recommendations regarding this proposal: *The right-of-way adjacent to Olympic View Drive should not be vacated, as it is needed for slope protection above the roadway. An alternative would be to vacate the wider right-of-way and provide a twenty to forty foot wide slope easement. •The proposed right-of-way between OVD and 80th Ave. W. can be removed. *The unopened 184th St. S.W. right-of-way lying east of the proposed plat road can be vacated provided a utility easement is retained. The unopened right-of-way lying west of the proposed plat road can be vacated, provided the plat road is made public and there is a pedestrian/bike access easement and construction between the proposed plat road and the westerly boundary of the proposed plat. The application is not considered complete until these issues are clarified. Perhaps the applicant should make two applications, one for vacation and one for street map amendment. CITY OF EDMONDS S796077.DOC ENGINEERING DIVISION ATTACHMENT 6 File No. ST-96-77 0 APPLICATION ROUTING FORM FILE: ST-96-77 AND CHECKLIST FROM: PLANNING c ROUTED TO: Engineering _ Fire Public Works 5/31196 ?P:ai��t:��ReG�J317>96 Staff Comments: J C 9 "49 wvw,vL.. • .�. � *Additional Information Required for RETURNEDr"i�,p� Engineering Fire Public Works Parks 8t Rec. Application " *Additional Studies Required to Complete Review ± Property Address__7704 OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE Date of Application__ 5/30/96 Type OFFICIAL STREET MAP AMENDMENT •_ Hearing Required:Yes.X,_ No Date of Hearing (if known) X Application X Fee X APO List Title Report X Vicinity Map Elevations Petition (Official Street Map) Critical Areas Determination OTHER COMMENTS Site Plan for Short Subdivision (8.5 x 11) Site Plan (11 x 17) Legals (Existing & Proposed) Environmental Assessment Proof of 2-Year Occupancy (ADU) Declarations (Variance & C. U. P.) Envimnmental Checklist ATTACHMENT 7 File No. ST-96-77. APPLICATION ROUTING FORM FILE: ST•96-77 AND CHECKLIST FROM: PLANNING ROUTED TO: Engineering Fire NiB*Wb' 3I+46 Parks ex Rec. _5/31 /96 Staff Comments:.9,i " *Additional Studies Required to Complete • Owner RETURNED Engineering 'e --� ' J AY ` ' 1996 Fire QhiiS Df Public Works uN Parks at Rec.. 1� ,.. r Property Address ??04 OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE _• Date of Application 5/30/96 • Type_ OFFICIAL STREET MAP AMENDMENT Hearing Required:Yeses_ No Date of Hearing (if known) X Application X Fee X APO List Title Report X Vcinity Map Elevations Petition (Official Street Map) Critical Areas Determination OTHER COMMENTS Site Plan for Short Subdivision (8.5 x 11) Site Plan (11 x 17) Legals (Existing & Proposed) Environmental Assessment Proof of 2-Year Occupancy (ADU) Declarations (Variance & C. U. P.) Environmental Checklist ATTACHMENT 8 File No. ST-96-77 j'1 APPLICATION ROUTING FORM FILE: ST-96-77 AND CHECKLIST FROM: PLANNING ROUTED TO: Engineering Fire Public Works 5131 /9A StaffComments:Lula RETURNED �996, Engineering Fire Public Works 44 Parks 8E Rec. ., ti (�{/�./i...C/YL..� ' '4.K//t.+V *.'vaw asc.+V w'r/i/va► (i(,/w" *Additional Information Required for G mplete Application *Additional Studies Required to Complete Review Owner-CHARLES MAKI • Property Address 7704 OLYMPtC VIEW DRIVE m Date of Applications/30/96 a Type OFFICIAL STREET MAP AMENDMENT e Hearing Requtred:Yes—_X_ No Date of Hearing (if known) X Application Site Plan for Short Subdivision (8.5 x 11) X Pee Site Plan (11 x 17) X APO list [ egais (Existing & Proposed) Title Report Environmental Assessment X vicinity Map Proof of 2-Year Occupancy (ADU) Elevations Declarations (Variance & C. U. P.) Petition (Official Street Map) Environmental Checklist Critical Areas Determination OTHER COMMENTS cSt. 189' June 28, 1996 CITY OF EDMONDS BARBARA FAHEY 250 6TH AVENUE NORTH • EDMONDS, WA 96020 • (206) 771.0220 - FAX 1206) 771.0221 MAYOR COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT Public Works • Planning • Parks and Recreation • Engineering Charles Maki 8235 Talbot Rd. Edmonds, WA 98026 Subject: ASSIGNMENT OF HEARING DATE Dear Mr. Shaw: Your application is now complete and has been scheduled for public hearing at the time and place listed below. Action: Amend Official Street Map File No. Assigned: ST-96-77 Date of Hearing: Jupy 12,1996 Time: 9:00 A.M. or as soon thereafter as possible. Place: Plaza Room, Edmonds Library 650 Main Street Hearing Body: Hearing 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 moved to the end of the agenda. Items not reached by the end of the hearing will be continued to the following month's agenda. If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact )Kirk Vinish, Project Planner at 771- 0220. Sincerely, Community Services Department - Planning Division Je �Wilson, AICP Current Planning Supervisor pc: File No. V-96-77 Kirk Vinish, Project Planner t0 srw.rr.DM a Incorporated August 11, 1890 0 06n8ftcoRRESUMOTICE Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan ®ILH� y2V�:*"'<l�s SciiSl,�rE ii } 1! Icst. zle = f— - Z F- M w (n Di U) LUU 1 U3 Date (n LL LU 0 To: Subject: Transmitting cc: Snoh. Co. Planning 6 Im • Incorporated A6gust 11, 1890 • Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan 0' 5k 5 } All MEMORANDUM CITY OF EDMONDS PLANNING DIVISION z z 250 STH AVENUE NORTH, EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 98020 z' g. U TO: JEFF WILSON, S PA RESPONSBILE OFFICIAL f, a V U Cn Q FROM:<.� w z;. Kirk Vinish U) LLj w OI Project Planner 2 a DATE: June 28,1996 LL SUBJECT: AMEND THE CITY'S OFFICIAL STREET MAP TO REMOVE THAT �-_ ( PORTION OF PROPOSED 60-FOOT WIDE RIGHT-OF-WAY z DESIGNATION BETWEEN OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE AND 80TH AVENUE z WEST STARTING JUST NORTH OF 184TH STREET SOUTHWEST. ALSO w La THE DESIGNATION OF THE EXISTING 20-FOOT WIDE RIGHT-OF-WAY Q OF 184TH STREET SOUTHWEST STARTING AT OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE U cn . o AND PROCEEDING WEST APPROXIMATELY 253 FEET SHALL BE REMOVED; AND REMOVE THE DESIGNATION F- i OF A PORTION OF THE w 11 UNUSED RIGHT-OF-WAY, TO ALLOW A VACATION OF THE SUBJECT _ U. RIGHT'S -OF -WAY PURSUANT TO AN APPLICATION SUBMITTED — UNDER CITY OF EDMONDS PLANNING DIVISION FILE NO. ST-96-78. z; (ni I have had the opportunity to review the proposed ordinance and the environmental checklist, and o all pertinent environmental information currently available. A copy of which are filed in the official z file for this ordinance (See File No. ST-96-77). Based on my review of all available information and adopted policies of the City, I recommend that a Determination of Nonsignificance should be issued. x t Should you have any questions concerning the information in this memo, please feel free to contact _ . ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Review by Responsible Official: p I concur ..---' I do not concur Comments: �Jef�ils�onAICP Date Responsible Official Attachments pc: ST-96-77 ST96-77.DOC Page I of I r APPLICATION ROUTING FORM FILE ST-96-77 AND CHECKLIST FROM: PLANNING ROUTED TO: Engineering _ Fire_ WN6VorW5ffl'l `fr `? Parks ex Rec. 5/31196 RETURNED 4�C42 Engineering - ''1AY i 1996 Fire OhKS Digp Public Works WUN Parks a Rec.— P q , 9g� Ilan . r✓tR�.tr7q-,.3 S�f t �tf.}r" {�-AS�n•�JT' �.c,ltn•rt-aS to ` c��c.r~ r:,�., ,..�F *Additional Studies Required to Complete 9 —,trcQ 1�1 Vri,i r f—)*-.`c:e, u • Owner CHARLES MAKI 1 Property Address 7704 OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE Date of Application 5/30/96 _ Type OFFICIAL STREET MAP AMENDMENT Hearing Required:Yes X No Date of Hearing (if known) X Application Site Plan for Short Subdivision (8.5 x 11) X fee Site Plan (11 x 17) X APO List Legals (Existing & Proposed) Title Report Environmental Assessment X Vicinity Map Proof of 2-Year Occupancy (ADU) Elevations Declarations (Variance & C. U. P.) Petition (Official Street Map) Environmental Checklist Critical Areas Determination OTHER COMMENTS .P*AIaPLICATION ROUTING FORM 1 AND CHECKLIST ROUTED TO: IS d b Fire 5/31 /96 Public Works 5/3 i 196 Parks 8z Rec. 5/31 /96 FKUM: FLANNINGR re^ r'." l t/,.. Q Engineering Fire Public Works Parks 8L Rec.- Staff Comments: Spat e&jj ��-D 613 P44 3 � fggr *Additional Information Required for Complete Application *Additional Studies Required to Complete Review * Owner • Property Address 7704 OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE _ Date of Application 5/30/96 • Type OFFICIAL STREET MAP AMENDMENT • Hearing Required:Yes—_X_ No Date of Hearing (if known) X Application X Fee X APO List Title Report __X_Vicinity Map Elevations Petition (Official Street Map) Critical Areas Determination OTHER COMMENTS C Site Plan for Short Subdivision (8.5 x 11) Site Plan (I I x 17) Legals (Existing & Proposed) Environmental Assessment Proof of 2-Year Occupancy (ADU) Declarations (Variance & C. U. P.) Environmental Checklist t 3 MEMORANDUM /Yrtr,��. 16 F-- LUUJ LUU g sate: dune 3, 1996 WUJ of To: Planning Division LU From: Gordy Hyde, Engineering Coordinator( S2 d subject: Street Man Amendment for Charles Maki z ' (7704 Olympic View Dr.) (ST-96-77) F- O W LU The application has been reviewed by the Engineering Division. The application should be revised to reflect three requested actions (1) vacation of Olympic View —� Drive right-of-way, (2) revision of the street map to remove the proposed right-of- n�i way connecting OVD to 80th Ave. W., and (3) vacation of 184th St. S.W. right -of- 8', way. — Z The Division has the following requirements/recommendations regarding this v proposal: zr • The right-of-way adjacent to Olympic View Drive should not be vacated, as it is needed for slope protection above the roadway. An alternative would be to vacate the wider right-of-way and provide a twenty to forty foot wide slope easement. *The proposed right-of-way between OVD and 80th Ave. W. can be j removed. 1 e The unopened 184th St. S.W. right-of-way lying east of the proposed plat ` road can be vacated provided a utility easement is retained. The unopened right-of-way lying west of the proposed plat road can be vacated, provided 0 the plat road is made public and there is a pedestrian/bike access easement and construction between the proposed plat road and the westerly boundary of the proposed plat. The application is not considered complete until these issues are clarified. Perhaps the applicant should make two applications, one for vacation and one for s street map amendment. CrIT OF EDMONDS ENGINEERING DIVISION ST96077.DOC �' 4 APPLICATION ROUTING FORM FILE: ST-96-77 AND CHECKLIST FROM: PLANNING ROUTED TO: RETURNED' En meerir g Engineering 3 r. 4 ig. it . ire A�— Public Wortcs Public Works is '� Parks at Rec. 5/31 /96 Parks 8x Rec. _ IN A-Np Staff Comments:_ *Additional Information Required for Complete Application *Additional Studies Required to Complete Review • Owner _ Property Address 7704 OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE • Date of Application___5/30/96 • Type OFFICIAL STREET MAP AMENDMENT • Hearing Required:Yes--X-._,. No Date of Hearing (if known) X Application X Fee X APO Ust Title Report X Vicinity Map Elevations Petition (Official Street Map) Critical Areas Determination OTHER COMMENTS Site Plan for Short Subdivision (8.5 x 11) Site Plan (11 x 17) Legals (Existing & Proposed) Environmental Assessment Proof of 2-Year Occupancy (ADU) Declarations (Variance & C. U. P.) Environmental Checklist n APPLICATION ROUTING FORM FILE: ST-96-77 AND CHECKLIST FROM: PLANNING ROUTED TO: RETURNED Engineering -5/3 1 /96 Engineering Fire 5/31 /96 Fire' Public Works 5/31 /96 Public Works Parks a Rec-5/31 /96 Parks a Rec. Staff Comments: *Additional Information Required for Complete Application *Additional Studies Required to Complete Review t • Owner • Property Address 7704 OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE • Date of Application 5/30/96 • Type_OFFICIAL STREET MAP AMENDMENT • Hearing Required:Yes_�_ No Date of Hearing (if known) X Application Site Plan for Short Subdivision (8.5 x 11) X Fee Site Plan (11 x 17) X APO List Legals (Existing & Proposed) Title Report Environmental Assessment X Vicinity Map Proof of 2-Year Occupancy (ADU) Elevations Declarations (Variance & C. U. P.) Petition (Official Street Map) Environmental Checklist Critical Areas Determination OTHER COMMENTS 4 .., t� —.. d� =z. LLJ w= J U U0 Vo w _� (o w d� LL = �d =w z� �a z� LU LM �o a U to of UJw LL ~ _c z Uu c� _ o� z 0 city of ed.--iionds land use application ❑ ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD ❑ COMP PLAN AMENDMENT ❑ CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ❑ HOME OCCUPATION ❑ FORMAL SUBDIVISION ❑ SHORT SUBDIVISION ❑ LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT ❑ PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOP ENT ❑ OF DMENT STREET VACATION ❑ REZONE ❑ SHORELINE PERMIT ❑ VARIANCE / REASONABLE USE EXCEPTION ❑ OTHER FILE # S T- r4 _71 ZONEZ- DATE Z 3`' ?6 REC'D BY _. g Pofr FEE -70 "' RECEIPT# 24S- S HEARING D TE / HE ❑ STAFF ❑ PB ❑ ADB ! CC ACTION TAKEN: ❑ APPROVED ❑ DENIED ❑ APPEALED APPEAL# Applicant I Y� G`��� i(/la �r Phone 1776 -- 064- i Address_523-,r (ct �607� Qooc�, A%orc�s, W'* 98b2,r- Property Address or Location 770 4- 0 J y �-++ f+ r C_� VrD"0,Vei �cf sccs a, wA 98oz4 Property Owner 14,ao Z.�/Zeg,Ka!G, t�irrJc Phone '774- - 0/39 Address 7704 of p c �/aw L7riy�� EIA"Plo kgd/. � WA . 98©Z 6 Agent �✓� h W fie- � �" Phone 77S"-- 67317 Address GoG 3a7�v �uFc.e , ��R-, o 1s� wA Q&c)zo Tax Acc # 37ca - obi - oo V - 0 ©o 8 Sec. / 8 Twp. 27 Af Rng. Legal Description__��� skrrgcu�o Details of Project or Proposed UsS1//2/W ci�e rl BG/ bd//� E 7o 72 v, o`p e r ZZ _o us P7 &^,=r ct! t / l t/G ti Tu et !ly tI see/ i n ct P/'.d ex Vr0 Lo! _ . _ - , / f ! ,a S ton We G Q. cf v !/t // X / 7 rJ d-e-e- 74a The undersigned applicant, and his/ her/ its heirs, and assigns, in consideration of the processing of thf application agrees to release, indemnify, defend and hold the City of Edmonds harmless from any and al damages, including reasonable attorney's fees, arising from any action or infraction based in whole or in part upor false, misleading, inaccurate or incomplete information furnished by the applicant, his/ her/ its agents o employees. The undersigned applicant grants his/ her/ its permission for public officials and the staff of the City of Edmonds tc enter the subject property for the purpose of inspection and posting attendant to this application. SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT/ OWNER/ AGENT C 0 0 ;inducing cover I -age) F'IaolpIOnts •i atacopiar Number: ' FACSIMILE EQUIP-MMNT: Automatic Group II (2.3 mine.)*. C3rcaup Ili r FROM: 1 C„D.,4..Vt�t.a 1 ittriare bra any problems , during tr8namission or dooumenta ar0 recaivad IncomppLeto, pp��we� cr911 C206) 771-0^.20 bind ask far Sander'a Teiecopler Number: (200) 77t-022 Q L�c-� -f-1� ,..� r-t�• yPl ©moo � � �.�.��► .� � am 6:\D\�V rdd�i�\RawParm. -, 1"caP OYatwd Aug t ii. logo - Sister Che loIZ-ftticrud — liaklnars. Japan TRANSMISSION REPORT (REDUCED SAMPLE ABOVE) ** COUNT # 3 *** SEND *** NO REMOTE STATION I.D. START TIME DURATION #PAGES COMMENT 1 2063393049 6-27-96 2:23PM TOTAL 0:01'44" 3 XEROX TELECOPIER 7020 VSt. 189v CITY OF EDMONDS BARBARA FAHEY MAYOR 250 5TH AVENUE NORTH - EDMONDS, WA 95020 - 1206) 771-0220 - FAX (206) 771.0221 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT Public Works + Planning • Parks and Recreation • Engineering v 0' a' Ln LU �` TELECOPIER:COVER PAGE cno LU u-a O TO: DATE TRANSMITTED: 2wj z 12 NUMBER OF PAGES: Z o (Including Cover Page) ww Recipients Telecopier Number: wl 05 FACSIMILE EQUIPMENT: W tuAutomatic/Group II ►z- F, U. (2,3 mins.); Group Ili Z1 ui W! FROM: ► — If there are any problems _ during transmission or 0 r documents are received Z incomplete, please call (206) 771-0220 and ask for Sender's T�ellecopier Number: (206) 771-0221 f RE: Y' LL6(--CSQ.... dm 0.W\Worddata\FaxFerm- •,Incorporated August 11,1890 e Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan a • r� THIS IS A LEGAL ADVERTISEMENT AND SHOULD BE BILLED TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT PUBLIC HEARING and NOTICE OF DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION W Name of Applicant: John & Julie Twenter L) o File No.: CU-96-53 � w Project Location: 8206184th St. SW J 3 Project Description: Conditional Use Permit to allow an Accessory Dwelliing Unit in conjunction with a v_) LL 1 existing single-family residence. w o? City Contact: Meg Gruwell Public Comment Period Due By: 7/12/96 LL a4 _ Lu , Name of Applicant: Mike Shaw z I-- File No.: V-96-76 r o Project Location: 20617 82nd Ave. W. w LU Project Description: Variance to reduce the required side setback from 7-1/2-feet to 5-feet to allow o, the construction of an approx. 480 square foot detached garage for an existing single-family residence. oa City Contact: Steve Bullock w w ! Public Comment Period Due By: 7/12/96 = U; u- p _ z Name of Applicant: Jeff Coats File No.: V 96-85 o Project Location: 709 Maple St. z Project Description: Variance to reduce the required rear yard setback from 15-feet to 5-feet to allow the addition of a two car garage, entryway & expansion of the existing single- family residence. City Contact: Kirk Vinish Public Comment Period Due By: 7/12196 Name of Applicant: Richard & Nancy Hale File No.: ST-96-72 Project Location: 88th Ave. W. between 218th St. W & 220th St. SW Project Description: Amend the City's Official Street Map to delete the potential future creation of the 88th Ave. W. right-of-way. City Contact: Kirk Vinish Public Comment Period Due By: 7/12196 Name of Applicant: Charles Maki t File No.: ST-96-77 & ST-96-78 Project Location: Adjacent to, or across 7704 Olympic View Dr.,18325 80th Ave, W, & 18408 79th PI. W. - Project Description: A Street Map Amendment to remove proposed 60 foot right-of-way between Olympic View Dr. and 80th Ave. W. Also, a Street Vacation to vacate the eastern 1/2 of 184th St. between Olympic View Dr. and 80th Ave. W., and that V 0 ® 7 r �, � � yn i � � � {, r. �' .`,. .... _+. v s.4._.��Au.A...v Auwr w....dv�.._ .............�.wcetn.uvnwwwrwu� .....�......._... _. ,� .. _ - � �, I'.V T- { o 890-1gg CITY OF EDMONDS ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Lq O Purpose of Checklist. U V3 w The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), chapter 43.21C RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the ,.I=: environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An environmental impact statement (EIS) must be prepared for all J LL! proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide w t information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. J LL. { Instructions for Applicants: Ln f r U i This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Governmental agencies use this z checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer O the questions briefly, with the most precise information keown, or give the best description you can. uZ3 I.0You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to j0. answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the U to 1 answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not know" or does not apply". complete answers to the pF ; questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. w W = Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer these questions U, E" t if you can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can assist you. u- pj z; The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels ui rn' U = of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining 2 if there may be significant adverse impact. Use of checklist for nonproject proposals: Complete this checklist for nonproject proposals, even though questions may be answered "does not apply." IN ADDITION, } complete the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (part D). j For nonproject actions, the references in the checklist to the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as J "proposer," and "affected geographic area," respectively. A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if tipplicable: /A 2. Name of applicant: 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: 4. Date checklist prepared: Page t OM CHMTlI0.25.93.MAS'rER XJ S. Agency requesting checklist: City of Edmonds. 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): CGWI-1 '"� f ".Vb .Civ» evcci•rce.ei� f-�lc a eu. 5 f.� e47L l�ccca r s v� PILm o .e, W P9;D 7. 8. (STAFF COMMENTS) Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with, this proposal? If yes, explain. �!t r-- i/ _ _ -# 4 _ n...%f, . , / J.r"�....e.,_T nA%t n (STAFF COMMENTS) List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. hm.c �soa-,cu✓r a b (STAFF COMMENTS) 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. Al., (STAFF COMMENTS) IQ. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. CHKLT1loa$43.MA$rM (STAFF COMMENTS) Page 2 of 22 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide Iegal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. / A�ar/�iavJ o/s�7�(t /!VEii 5eG /25, 7"'07A/ 4,-0, W,A4, Wr fir-eeT c�c+�cYres3 a Y' /83/�r= /✓ �G+tG, t/r¢w Va EcYarco L (STAFF COMMENTS) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT N%�'� a T�Q aysurcr-s `r� 7, 1 ` -e 54-t o 4.,, 5 a H-c, r � /a �ls-cam:- f - o tn. t� T PA- s_,� B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS —�- 1. Earth a. Geer��•C Z /!neral description of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other: 7vi ztl-V A-*//lyW or A-* 4G �/Q.-1...__O P- A, 0 $1 �s - A -GY c;L 5'A-vra. / (STAFF COMMENTS) b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? ^;, go o/ (STAFF COMMENTS) What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. Page 3 of 22 CHKVr110a5.93.MA.WER x ; ( /�..e. S• t /-C, Gee vyr v t aC� Qi a� r �a. H tl ���GYGttb� -� �k p-�"C."� t 4e- S ta. f u L t+Q. W !, COH t57 0"'LC.ti/Go �'7 fi �.tY�e7'Ci G3' . Y y (STAFF COMMENTS) d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. r (STAFF COMMENTS) ea Describe the purpose, type and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. r0,,0 c s cO� 10 a X,p o a 7" 5o rn -e— r t "s 3 (STAFF COMMENTS) f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? use? If so, generally describe. �o l a<we. 2Sc�6 ecT ey^o earn ice` �Ja y e c C ct v"i C le csri ro, �ji cz ,� !O ZZ 7p L..a�. s-sz.,s a�^7�_,p v� as ,o 0 3• crf r� vo �. (STAFF COMMENTS) g. About what percent of the site will. be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings}? { r0i ®t® h. Proposed measures to reduce or control 2. AIR a. (STAFF COMMENTS) or other impacts to the earth, if any: i i What types of emissions to the air would, result from the 'proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. _ r{(bTA b. Are there any off -site sources of emissions or odor that may effect your proposal? If so, generally (STAFF COMMENTS) C. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to the, if any: (STAFF COMMENTS) 3. WATER a. Surface: (1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? ` If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. s- yLCv/t� (fffAFF COMMENTS)a Page 5 of 22 Is CHKLTtt4:S9).MA.STCM i "11 (2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. 411A (STAFF COMMENTS) (3) Estimate the amount of rill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. Al A (STAFF COMMENTS) (4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. (STAFF COMMENTS) (5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on*thi site plan. (STAFF COMMENTS) (6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. (STAFF COMMENTS). Pag6 6 of 22 CHKLT/1425-93.MAWER (STAFF COMMENTS) (2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals...; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. X►F/kkf.P— (STAFF COMMENTS) C. Water Runoff (including storm water): (1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. �t «ryuzv q ✓�o-c.t-,c-...F_���.�_de7 @ ! 4s e9 a. acG/ rL %¢a..� '�! t o !4e G !3! t tSTa4:, t M S� 3 ye.- e /r! h {� (STAFF COMMENTS) (2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. { E9 (STAFF COMMENTS) Page 7 of 22 cHMT/10-1s.93MAs7ER �+ a. Check or circle tYPes of vegetation found on the site: w p deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other: 2 IJ ✓ evergreen tree: fir, cedar; pine, other: <# ✓ shrubs C!c ua. ✓ grass 2 F— pasture O; Z crop or grain Lu w 2 of wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bulrush, skunk cabbage, other: v (na a water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoii, other: ,y L other types of vegetation: 2Ui 9` & (STAFF COMMENTS) ui Ni U S O � Z b. What kind and amount of vegetation will he removed or altered? A v' a* r' e ! 'T . .6y^��i'/l o t e -14 ly 0.. lw ea rea.c( •4"'1 ! 2 /y- (STAFF COMMENTS) - C. List threatened or endangered species/ known to be on or near the site. d% A-- vL,*,t j, 4 ae! fa CFtKLT/104S93.MASMR (STAFF COMMENTS) Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other materials to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: Page 8 or22 --77777777777777 _L110 � f�L'�•�YGGt'�r'L.. -A'.�l �i�4j S' �! ✓!'�•Cr. • . 1 (STAFF COMMENTS) S. Animals u' a. Check or circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on L� or nearthe site: D• iv birds: hawk, heron, eagle, sow nabirds, other: Z ' mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: (STAFF COMMENTS) w D' o: rg� b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. ? Uj o; z (STAFF COMMENTS) C. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. _Llll� (STAFF COMMENTS) d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance //wildlife, if any: p/ ti (STAFF COMMENTS) 6. Energy and Natural Resources Page 9 of 22 CHMTt10.:S-91MAVER Zz � - UJ; cc mi w U: J U a. LU J N LL w� J L_ Nd r x; z� E- 0', z w Ue m o1 h. = tw.7 LL 0 U= OF z a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed proj'ect't's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, /manufacturing, etc. LET l�tnown a- fear lr�� tyw"l P Gr Gcr�s ¢S�2c�iYc� w/��.. J .T /�. � �� // � � o � .�� �,Q �.../� su /�. 4- � •� 11 � eFol✓ %l.Crt r7 r h �1 i ✓t e7i c/ i� lGe.ryeeS (STAFF COMMENTS) b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. �11 a (STAFF COMMENTS) c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: _t (STAFF COMMENTS) 7. Environmental Health a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so describe. t ® 11 (STAFF COMMENTS) Page 10 of 22 CHXLTl10.25.93.MA5rER 9E f i (1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. -LtLe r.5_2 (STAFF COMMENTS) (2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: (STAFF COMMENTS) b. Noise (1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? (STAFF COMMENTS) (2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? indicate what hours noise would come from the site. c"5 J/c-'("/C094oA-cAc'1ia,-- *1oi� &r,li�x AF (S707 COMMENTS) / (3) Proposed measures to/reduce or control noise impacts, if any: (STAFF COMMENTS) page i l of 22 ClIKU110-25•43.MMbTER 8. Land and Shoreline Use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? (STAFF COMMENTS) b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. (STAFF COMMENTS) C. Describe any structures on the site. a Na USGv t ✓} V-G- (STAFF COMMENTS) d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? (STAFF COMMENTS) e. What is the current zoning; classification of the site? 12.5-/2 �t t ® a (STAFF COMMENTS)h - eYiF 1. p }u Page 12of22 el CtIXLTI*25-93.MASfER } is 7/•Dt . t'f5'*�: `.`eT -�� -".yt x � 'J+� { }`h ;e�! a -t i f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? z j E- U (STAFF COMMENTS) J U) w g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master plan designation of the sitez IZ4 J N i U) W to s OE (STAFF COMMENTS) ui F S, Z Pi F- O; W w; h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. � 0 r ._u. wH. • � Lt. Wb•t�.-'E�. b �f ' Q.yt..V ' �'- [ 0-5,3 / �R C w..7"t C-y6.T Q tc.T 'S / /�^X�G S f i O � . "Z0,..gaa /O c-�f/s G X 1 5T � o Nt•9 ��.. /Z.�L� o �. Q tli LLl © E) i /U. zi (STAFF COMMENTS) Ili Ni O z i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? (STAFF COMMENTS) p j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? '2 I HAP S /10 t--r ®' (STAFF COMMENTS) Page 13 of22 MLTn0-2S-91MnsrdR i.s i C,.^Y t0 y s 9 k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: Ale u -e_ (STAFF COMMENTS) I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, 1 if any: �c c�rY�, �toO /4vw cr.f - i (STAFF COMMENTS) I s 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. / -g l,_ f g" ad�l / �nao.ne..s u�-.A/ �t v -oUZ110111 16 L 1 dr OpatSa../ (STAFF COMMENTS) { b. Approximately how many units, if any would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low- income housing. 71.Q e 0, 412& Z rrx e. it�a a►vc'ccl �' n 8 'a a 6ac!-e_ (STAFF COMMENTS) 11. C. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: CHKLT/10.25.43.MASTER (STAFF COMMENTS) Page 14 of 22 i i� i 10. Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including Antennas; what is the principle exterior building material(s) proposed? j/_ k Yet,,,, �. 444 45 �; •"�... < 1{• e.• i/' d _ 6Gt vv-vLc. Gt I bit c{. �e !� 2�ss /c , i�,G.� Olt./ [ cae C-4j (STAFF COMMENTS) b. Wheat/views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? (STAFF COMMENTS) C. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: t 9Orr�e (STAFF COMMENTS) Il. Light and Glare a. What/ type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? limo - (STAFF COMMENTS) b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? (STAFF COMMENTS) Page 15 of22 C: KLT/10.?i.9d.MAVVt - 'r C. What existing oft' -site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? z �( (STAFF COMMENTS) - W: v 0! 0 d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: cn wi � / , _t 1- - 0 w� �a - n tiQ, (STAFF COMMENTS) s d ' z I= of z H, 12. ' Recreation ,. n iu ul: o; a. What designated and inrormal recreational opportunities are the immediate/vicinity? UOin ' //in X S '% S ab N TI G w Wt a `f_ 1.7�t/srttJ1 c. Yfe ty /yi1/ �. S 01 u. Oi. cun)! (STAFF COMMENTS) O~ z b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreation uses? If so, describe. A 4 n 4„� +� �2 erc t►vx a o�- (STAFF COMMENTS) C. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, includingrecreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: (STAFF COMMENTS) S Page 16 of 22#4� , C}ELT/I0.:3.91MASTER - "2rFh� -1 '�- .. .. .. .. «.'r`w"C�'K S a�4 ," !,Z5,r�-,�'!,i`�t ixnK�`+ty ::•... p'++R'{iri 13. Historic and Cultural Preservation a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. 41ou.c. (STAFF COMMENTS) b. Generally describe any landmarks br evidence of historic, archaeological, 'scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. (STAFF COMMENTS) C. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: JU cs v�.rL (STAFF COMMENTS) 14. Transportation a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access. to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. -A �e-go'c-aV 70 sc.�d�cG7� �tf� .a-�"P" (STAFF COMMENTS) b. Is site currently served by public transit? If no, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? / �/ s rts/-C,. ge3' 14 ? it /S"C) G� wl t..-c tczblc oK 74e jse-ray`1t 77,aLe Q eas?�% e •L t-l—. �'Gz 7�e'r.'s e�-7�/o-vt o a� (DIv. n, C. V e 40 :l�i^i v � � 7671Y-Ave, kfi Pago 19 of 22 C1IKLT110-3.93.MAVE12 Ito .:: .._._';::.: ......,: .:._..,.....:..:.,;,... ..,........_`.__... . _:. -. _..., .!. ;.,":': .. ...... ...a .veaw,r,. n.xn;rxx� i .... ;.1.c..... .�s ..... (STAFF COMMENTS) C. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? P12.1-6-1s cc Ge ea 4sna 6e. .�-� ,a �! 4� a~, 6 v Gc 'OcCc-S . /L/o .0ceo4--01-v gal s w' '.. J U' � �:' (STAFF COMMENTS) CO UJ LU :y J H; Ln LL 8 — 0 LU d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including J driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). ' U-_((" /' j �t eu1—e1L"SCLG NO"/ I7 dt !20 )� %G rizot N `7 �� 7 `h2 L� �yp o r i 71 Z.,. r! f 4e M�G! t c z 0 w tu' (STAFF COMMENTS) :3 O03 Et t w uy T U.{ e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, "—' Z, generally describe. di �� /Vo 0 z (STAFF COMMENTS) f f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project?. If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. i�' � � L�t.ar�Ya�l Ql..T '7"� l.� / 4YL �+, G7 6L/T 4G/s'cln.tt-Ia+j /J ✓o �J L/! V (GJ `. L�o /! / a� (STAFF COMMENTS) t { s) + y Page 18 or 32 y�mi ..' CIAKU110-25-91MASTER g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: of ?� • 3 It,7,t �. i j (STAFF COMMENTS) ct 15. Public Services s a. Would the -project, result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. LP �o ,r 24 �u D t to S (STAFF COMMENTS) R Prop/used measures _to/reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any: (STAFF COMMENTS) t® Page 19 of 22 CHM110d23M MAS CR - - 9 ... Or � y b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility • providing the service, and the general j construction activities on the site or i theimmedistte vicinity which might be needed. / / ..� T K Yte�Lcryt, G1';7 r 5 1tl�rr 2 Z _ �'{} ~ w' (STAFF COMMENTS) -J V1 3 Nw -J tt.- C. SIGNATURE mQ s The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. U. a { tt) d r up S' _ Z t-' z O' Signature of Proponent Date Submitted w w, ni i. C' V , ww. = H u. pF 211 ui (n1 E- H O z MI i D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (do not use this sheet for project actions) Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the list of the elements of the environment. When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms. L How would the proposal be, likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; production, storage, or release of toxic or haaardous substances; or production of noise? 3. Proposal measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: //.a How would the proposal he likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life? IA Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: _N 1A How would the proposal he likely to deplete energy or natural resources? N Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: it/ A- CHMT/10.25-93.MASTER Page 21 of 22 ,. 0 W _j U� W w LU ew O LLQ, �D _O W; rs zr r O LU LU n: � () tn'I oLU E'l up -z Lei V3 Uy o~ z Oul -- ----•- - -•••- •••• t••••t,.,,,.,, vv ..nc,� av we ,n auc�.a taro viuucUttiuy maiNitivc ul"— ur areas utmignaleu for engine or under study} for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, noodpiains, or prime farmlands? Jlf o -P Y-'P-C.0 as vl EG-G 44 'S t Al V -e- GL v�-C4 S Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: Al /A S. How would the proposal he likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? 1 Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? A -I* Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: �trz....e_. ?. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. Al CHKLT/10•?SA3.MA.W6R Page 22 of 22 CITY OF EDMONDS 2S0 STH AVENUE NORTH, EDMONDS, WA 98020 (2%) 771.0220 RCW 197-11-970 Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE Description of proposal: Amend the City's official street map to remove that portion of proposed 60-foot wide right-of-way designation between Olympic View Drive and 80th Avenue West starting just north of 184th Street Southwest. Also the designation of the existing 20-foot wide right-of-way of 184th Street Southwest starting at Olympic View Drive and proceeding west approximately 253 feet shall be removed; and remove the designation of a portion of the unused right-of-way, to allow a vacation of the subject right's -of -way pursuant to an application submitted under City of Edmonds Planning Division File No. ST-96-78 (see File No. ST-96-77). Proponent: Charles Makie Location of proposal, including street address if any: 250 5th Avenue North Lead agency: CITY OF EDMONDS The lead agency for this proposal has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement is not required under RCW 43.21.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. There is no comment period for this DNS. X This DNS is issued under 197-11-340(2); the lead agency will not act on this proposal for 15 days from the date below. Comments must be submitted by July 15, 1996. Responsible Official: Jeffrey S. Wilson Position/Title: Current Planning Supervisor, Department of Community Services - Planning Divisio n Phone: 771-0220 Address: City of Edmonds, 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds, WA 98020 Date: G /w g e.Signature�_7y ,.cP 9 XX You may appeal this determination to Robert Chave, Planning Manager, at 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds, WA 98020, no later than July 15 j. , by filing a written appeal citing the reasons. You should be prepared to make specific factual objections. Contact Jeffrey S. Wilson to read or ask about the procedures for SEPA appeals. XX Posted on June 28, 1996, at the Edmonds Public Library, Edmonds Community Services Building, and the Edmonds Post Office. XX Distribute to "Checked" Agencies on the reverse side of this form, along with a copy of the Checklist. Page 1 of 2 (YR).(#)DN/(DATE).SEPA ®:,3 .... _.. .....:::._. ......:.:......, Mailed to the following along with the Environmental Checklist: xx Environmental Review Section xa Snohomish County Planning Department Department of Ecology Attn: > Steve Holt, Planning Director P.O. Box 47703 Ist Floor, Courthouse Olympia, WA 98504-7703 Everett, WA 98201 S Za — w Ju .J Q ., .. o Attachments u) w J (n p pc: File No. ST-96-77 w SEPA Notebook Paul Mar, Community Services Director Robert 62 Q tPPP cn d Chave, Planning Manager r S w;j 1— _ Z E" F- 0: Z w w! (.) N w w+jt x w 01 _Z ui to 0 z } t Page 2of2ti�f;'v (YR)-WDN/(DATE).SEPA 5 ;. 0 t .. 4y ,•... . r .. .,. . „ .. ... .. _ . , . ? OR RJ Am ... _ ®r. �FPN�ti'r , ,T l�ia"s: k .sk3.�. a.3 a!,�1:,_N'., ,ix1k S S:,' LEGAL DESCRIPTION: PARCEL A: Lot 9, Block 1, Plat of Admiralty Acres, as per plat recorded in Volume 12 of Plats on page 48, records of Snohomish County. Situate in the County of Snohomish, State of Washington. 'r PARCEL B• Lot 10, Block 1, Plat of 'Admiralty Acres, as per plat recorded in Volume ? 12 of Plats, page'48, records of Snohomish County. Situate in the County of Snohomish, State of Washington. PARCEL C: All that portion of Tract 106, Edmonds, Sea View Tracts, as per plat recorded in Volume 3 of Plats on page 76, records of Snohomish County, ;; e lying Southwesterly of Edmonds -Beverly Park Road; ! EXCEPT the East 212 feet thereof as measured along South line of said Tract 106 and EXCEPT any portion lying "within Beverly Park -Edmonds Road. Situate in the County of Snohomish, State of Washington. `4 f 6 larsJi 3f'. PETITION FOR STREET OR ALLEY VACATION TO THE HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 4� WE, the undersigned, owners of two-thirds of the real property abutting za upon that public right-of-way describedbelow, do hereby' petition the City of — w Edmonds to vacate said public right-of-way, described as follows: .L V w ILn , Ln all situate in the City of Edmonds, County of Snohomish, State of Washington, LL and request that said City Council by Resolution fix a time and place when this. LU Petition shall be heard and determined by that authority, which time shall not be more than sixty (60) days nor less than twenty (20) days after the passage rr. of such Resolution. LL Q c4 d These pages are a group of pages containing an identical text and prayer intended = W; by the signers of this Petition to be presented and considered as one Petition �- and may be filed with other pages containing additional signatures which Z cumulatively may be considered as a single Petition. H 01 . Z WARNING: Every person who signs this Petition with any other than his true LU Uj �, name, or who knowingly signs more than one of these Petitions, or signs a- - p petition seeking an election when he is not a legal voter, or signs a petition U {, when he is otherwise not qualified to 'sign, or who makes herein any false o statement, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. HF W wti PRAYER OF PETITION: For the vacation of z, SIGNATURE* PRINTED NAME ADDRESS DATE F 3. l.�/.�-.v Z. ,^¢J2JC /�ytpd^ 7�i9't�'�• .t /�'/y'a� 5. 6. 7. 8. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. *See special instructions on cover sheet. 10/22/84 EDMO S ITY OF 250 5NAve N Edmo WA 98020 David Johnson 7810 182nd Pl SW Edmonds, WA 98026 Wallace Danielson Jr. Susan Danielson Jr. 7822 182nd Pl SW Edmonds, WA 98026 Linda McCullough 18426 79th Pl W Edmonds, WA 98026 Richard & Tina O'Neill 18414 '79th ` P1 W Edmonds, WA 98026 John Heuerman 18419 79th P1 W Edmonds, WA 98026 Arne Goedecke 1722 NE 145th St #201 Seattle, WA 98155 Earl Smith 18325 80th Ave W Edmonds, WA 98026 Han & Regina Park 7704 Olympic View Dr. Edmonds, WA 98026 UNITED STATES POSTAL SER 850 Cherry Ave San Bruno, CA 94099 Lars & PauletteJohnson8514 192nd St SW Edmonds, WA 98026 John & Muriel Quick 7914 182nd P1 SW Edmonds, WA 98026 Dana Gillet PO Box 7026 Lynnwood, WA 98046 Robert Joss - 18415 79th PI W Edmonds, WA 98026 Williams, 0-&-es- 18427 ­79th Pl W Edmonds, WA 98026 F A & Gloria Lafond 18227 80th Ave W Edmonds, WA 98026 U S P 'PA , SERVICE 850 Ch ry Ave San B , CA 94099 John Mellor 606 Sater Lane Edmonds, WA 98020 Roland & Julie Brown 7809 182nd Pl SW ! Edmonds, WA 98026 Kathleen O'Bryan 7817 182nd PI SW Edmonds, WA 98026 Gary & Charlene Flamm 18418 79th P1 W` Edmonds, WA 98026 Norman Barringer 18405 79th Pl W Edmonds, WA 98026 Glenn Roberts 18416 78th Ave W Edmonds, WA 98026 ----Katherine- Morley 18203 80th Ave W Edmonds,.WA 98026 James Thompson 18305 80th Ave W Edmonds, WA 98026 Charles Maki - 8235 Talbot Rd. Edmonds, WA 98026 x Attach this notarized declaration to the adjacent property owners list �s r On my oath, I certify that the names and addresses provided represent all properties located within 300 feet of the subject property. Signature of Applicant or Applicant's Representative Subscribed and sworn to before me this 5�2 day of 19� �oc Notary Public in and for the State of Washington Residing at �s-►`'-»-_-�- ----------------- NOTARY PUBUC STATE OF WASHINGTON DIN BOCK MY Appoi dment Expires MAY-30,1907 APOA06LATempWorms J of f fn 2 of s Qth OLSA r 02GO Blosa 5 � U p, 4 r z CD W LU ft LL + / LLI 3 t4 BGi i 4 gOibO�/0 — o ! LLI 02 Af o� ZIL. S.W. 3 2 LL a ' SE VIEW RS 2 to d i o 1 2 3 5 LJ tz- _' aOD 4 0-5 o2 CO — (T2 4) °° � Pf r ni o 9 r W DMIRALTY s _-- o S� 081 Q 03 02 14 z;1�14431 �, !3 9 s,�i �y\ ,,• t ,; t= A' v - - !2 O of 04 l 03 I i 1... a oo S.W.— // /2 !3 04 7- 9 �� /0s 4 3 105 _ � 14 B e4p c 02 02 F 0 T 6 17 rB J9 20 21 5 185th. PL. S.1tu 2z J 01 o4 4 3 JJ 104 CO � w G 2 1D24 23 04ro Dl t 800 2 1 Q �� �, t' OG o2 07 to T � ~ approach for all parties. The terms of the contract include authorization to apply for necessary approvals to develop the property. The —_agreement _--_reserves complete discretion to the —. Council _--to _hear and determine any development davnlopmen proposal for the property.The City Attorney and the developers legal counsel have prepared a draft Conditional Sales Contract(see Exhibit 2) ` wherein the City would sell the property at $100,000. Pursuant to the possible sale of this property , the City commissioned a'appraisal mdetermined the property's estimated market value. The appraised price w"w'p"vms shown inExhibit 1 Recommended Acflon: Authorized the Mayor tosign the attached Conditional Sales Contract. _ :w• • " t • I t • i R y 7 R — IF u {f 111 a • ! C I Y V LACE i 'YI ST. SW .a f alit M ► ,Sw 1 1S A lsi ' it � • LSl � 9 — p { �..�. _.._.. X y OF » 2 `o - W • ° • EDMONDS iii j ♦ , Y z Q ..., A S of s V — 12 -Q M 29 O ` 4 Ln • I Y��.N r7 ,3 t I SFnvIEw f a ,♦ Me t T • �) -.r __ •- b t { • � I ♦• SE avIEw^ } FORE St ] r • S • A R • a n 'ir rc n to t: C,trV... • + � Q ! t ! � S n 'G NLN On•3� AO •'. SCAVICW FORES! TRAOTs '• I'll,I'll,�NO S Z Otv. RO i• 5-- 3� ♦( 16S PL!SW .tt A n a • s 1 • • I O S • t , A 2• is _ t! 186 TH S T. S.W. y" E A i 1 - - - f :w DIY NO. a •7 .♦ r • s ♦F-1- r13_.® t1. _ I ...0 7 se S.W. +. r �• �• SEAvtCw FOREST ALCERT •--iAICN`S " ._. �ri Ts '? U FOREST • f n •r 1 7 t3 +♦ a S I • R a I J ft LNOR 14 157TN PL.S.W. ISTTH ST. S.W. "" �+" S '� j s O. t♦i o. IF IDS ++ y t SCAVtLSt * A 137 t3 t TRACtS !t 71. 7 .. n •a : •i t 7 IS i S' ♦ 3 ' ! TRACTS' . • j I } , ! ow Not I t a b t A i.) t• 7f 1 tai t+• 7a • 1 S s • R lb 7TN PC !w I i ffffff N ST. S.W w 3 : s ISOM S7 Sw e <J u t •• f u t ♦ 3 .... t3 t a +! ! wg00laN0 E TiTES • i S to - w t SEAVIEW J s t y'' 1Ai m a HE a s 3 o--r- o y- GRAD j s • iMDis� x '#. ELEMENTARY W OSCAR E- — --JENSENS w f I t • a f • 189TN PL. S.W. Do 'A'. f # I T # ( 7 T # f T It • 41 K ,C •S p�j 0. is j)F •t IAa T - 190 TH ST. S• T , Qil: - i C��o i • a �� ' t ,".RE IRA.:T3 SEA VIEWr SEATTLE ��w ,t j s IE SIERRA PARK n- X -zs 91STIST S.W. I L y t ESTAtES !NO2 11 a ` II S Nt >0 M'rs� R w rt,`J� 4 s ! 8191 S^TT ST, r S.W. • f a a r ` 72 • ..3.,. f •... '.._.) ~-s f 8 t 1 S , f • 7 + --- $US RIAN- -TR CTs -- t191 ST 5 # r ♦• # 7 t !1 l�a S • 5T, S.W. }..T �, i SIERRA •✓- ) •a R ,lICRRA 1 7 i 'SIERRA 1 I •• • { -.•. � Y r! i VILIA , + r} 1 •♦ n „. ; :5tERRA •y ♦ 33 192 Nd L. a S.W. .:. -- 7} f t♦ 13 I tt � f t t0 f � • i r J tt t3 L S 0•N : •t ••at A t♦VIKAOC7t �J t3 t �YIL LADE 2i M tt ri H 1! 17+ t• ' 110 I w tolt ., 7 1• + t a r is O N O i • S`• { a » R M A to S. t7 (13 N ( ' 6 # O h M T• �. AICADO- L, IN SO-P i, t S• st OIv O3 A n 1 _ b DRIVE 9 i93 R0 PL. S' M1:. CONDITIONAL SALES CONTRACT THIS CONDITIONAL SALES CONTRACT (the "Contract") is -made thi's day of, , 1997, by and between Dr. and Xrso Man Park (hereinafter -Park"), and City of < Edmonds (hereinafter "city"). Z, LU The parties wish to engage in a conditional sales contract LU the terms or which are outlined in this document. _J U 0 cn 0 LU in consideration of the mutual covenants hereinafter set En Lu 3: forth, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and _J �_ Ln LL I suf riciency of which is hereby acxnowledged by each party from - 'other, LU O: the THE -PARTIES HERETO AGREE TO THE FOLLOWING TERMS: Cr n This contract is contingent Upon the parties successfully LL <, =1 applying to the City of Edmonds to obtain a contract rezone and obtaining authorization from the City to construct a planned residential development out of the subject -site. The real estate Z to be developed is as shown on the preliminary site plan which is: J__0 enclosed and known as "Enclosure All. Enclosure A is hereby Z LU U3 incorporated* into this Agreement as if fully set forth herein. The subject property shall be known as "Seaview Park Estates". LU LUi = U The City and its City Council's discretion to exercise its LLP 0 governmental anti quasi-judicial power is intended to be -fully Z preserved under the terms of this agreement. This agreement shall not be interpreted to impair the decision making and quasi­ judicial authority. of.any official or officials representing the z~7 I city. WHEREAS the City's involvement would be limited to pr6viding title to the subject property and providing an authorization to include this property in the subdivision request which will be made by Park. WHEREAS the City grants to Mr. Charles Maki power of attorney to act -on behalf of the City in proceeding throughout the application process described above. WHEREAS the City"s liability will be limited to the value of the property contributed and Dr. Park will personally indemnify the City as to all development costs associated with the development of -the subdivision. WHEREAS this conditional sales contract will automatically terminate upon denial by the Edmonds City Council of a request to subdivide the property; This contract, will close, within 30 days after the project is recorded in Snohomish county. CO=TTTONAL SA=S CONTRACT -1- to WHERPA9 the Price of the subject property shall be fixed at $100,000-00 it -all property is rezoned. If the property is not rezoned, the price or the subject property should be -subject to negotiation. This Agreement may be modified, altered or amended only by a* writing signed by each of the Parties and duly notarized. waiver of any term or provision in this Agreement by any Party shall not be considered to be a waiver of any other term or provision of this Agreement or breach of this Agreement regardless of the nature of such subsequent event or breach. This Agreement shall be interpretedas the final -written agreement.or the Patties. it is agreed ana understood that all prior. conversations, discussions, letters, and aqr*61efift have -been merged into thin Agreement and that this written Agreement constitutes -the Final.Agreement between the Parties, ..notwithstanding any prior oral or written understanding.to, the :'contrary. 119 WXT"06 WHER40r, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement the- day and year first above -written. Dr. and Mrs. Ran Parx City of Edmonds. Charles BY, Maki, Project Manager Barbara S. Fahey Its Its CONDITIONAL SALES CONTRACT -2- EXHIBIT 2 0 A.- underaigmud , a notary pubUo in and for tho Bt&" of Washington, duly commLanioned and sworn, personally appeared CRAIMU UM, to me known to be the Representative of'Dr. and Mrs. San Park, the Parties that executed the within and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged the said instrument to be the free and voiuntary'act and deed of said Parties, for the uses and purposes therein • mentioned, and on oath stated that tie in authorized to execute the paid instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal hereto affixed the day and year above ' written. Notary vublLa in and or the State. -of Washington; ran cling at My commiaaion expires: Type or Prirtt Name Above STATR OF WASBYNGTON ) COQNTY OF SNOHOMISH ) On this day of 1997, before me, the undersigned, a fiotary Public in and for the state of Washington, duly ,c+ommiseioned and sworn, personally appeared to me, mn4nnu8 a. FARM, known to be the Reprehantative -of. the 'City of HdmondB, the Party that executed the within aud.foregoing instrument, end acknowledged the said instrument to be the free and 'voluntary act and deed of said Party,. for the uses and purgosea therdia mentioned, and. on -oath stated that he is authorized to execute the Said instrument. WITNESS my hand'and official meal hereto affixed the day and year above written. c:\Wp51\ctlents\edsb4yvicity.con CONDITIONAL SALES CONTMCT -3 Notary public In and for the State of Washington, r8diding at My ccnat►ioaion expirems Type or Print Nam Above EXHIBIT 2 EXHIBIT 2 Bradford and Robbins Sattware 1 AAllr% AIMMInAlC. A2 — sorrower N/A -- - - "E;- GLfA cans"Trou 03.00 MpRoNrence TB 455 A3 ProperiyAodrus 183XX80th AVenuetWest Orly _ Edmonds Corny —.Snohomish Store WA Z%) Code 98026 - Legal Description Block 001 D-00 - Lot 12 AdmiralAcres Sam Price s NIA Nis of Sale NIA LoanTorin Unknown - Ym- lon)"nYROLSAPP(abod MF44 MLeasehold ­[n—D.MNpis pUO Acuttainaali Estate Taxes s Exempt 6" L-Chamestobapoldbyealsors- N/A other Saks comerstir. N/A LandarriClIont City of Edmonds Address 250 Sth Avenue NorthA �98020 004ant Vacant APP-loor He ML. IG;neker lorturicilons to Appraiser A Appraise fee simple interest in,.above 1Effienttd IpPerty. Location Urban Suburban plural Good Avg. Fair pw SUM Up ovor75% 25% to 75% QUnder 215% Ernploynasht sl4buty F-1 LM M 0 Growth All, f-I Fully Dev. Rapid Steady slow C"wilemA to Ernployrnard F-1 a] 0 Cj Properly Values ❑ Increasing stable ❑ D*dk*v Convardmo to Shopping M FRI 0 n Darriand/Supply ED shortage In Balance Q overapply Convenlencil 10 schools MIMMM Mortaring Time M Under 3 Mos. 4.6 Mom Ow 8 Mos, Adequacy of Public Trars�pqrfjj]Dn nX C] C:] PMNM Land use 75 %1 Family --L %z-4 FanAy 5 %Aphr _2_%Corl 5 %Courenexciat M X %indusuffid 10 %vacard % AdlqacyofL)IIUUs F-1 CK M C1 -"MLkjy(-) Change In Protons Lard G?)7-,, Ukly no Use Property c(Convallioully ED M M 0 ifacifides (*) From To Protection from Dentional Comillonol E) MX f-1 ED Prodorninaut Occupancy MR 0-5 % Vic" Poke and Fln; Protection F-1 MR M Single Farrilly Price Range $ 100 lof; 500 Piredoodnent value s 165 General Approrams of PMertles El [@ I Single, Farnily Age 0 y- I- --j 0 �Yls- Predominant Age 40 yrz Appeal to ma*ai F-1 Comments Ir"Cing time raiders, famrable of urd"oralski, affecting madostabay (9,g, pubic Perot, 4:h0ols, New, miss) -The subjeds nelghbojkqqd consists MaWy. L cesudy su ofavers ge ounlit v homes. Sub*eCt has access to all nb 2pQrtracintles. Itislocated a roximam1vtwo miles northeast ofthe districtO� Edmonds. F ds, Commcentral business dis in die area include Snohomish County Mrs. MeadOwdale Playfields, and Lmidale Part Local sbopping.1s.available aloe gH 99. oftnerrolons - .- I See Plat Map - 28,15OSip ft Sq. FtorAc. Vq lContarLol f-91 Zorurg Classification RS-12000 (Residential) f7do F-J-.tcqJ.fo..hV.,uMj.. —pr000rgunproverner" Hliptestand baslu" EnPresent u" F-1 other ($Poem Public Other (O.Sclbo) OFF SITEIMPROVEMENTS to middle -Sloited Street Access FX-jPub0cMprfxj.11:7 Twical GAS Surfacir Paved sit" Rectangular Water FX Maintenance Public � Private view am Sawaj3fl FXISIO-S-1 nCtullonutter Chain a sacs 0 no elect. 4 T.I. M k M Street Upbut to thpropMlyfocalsd Ina HUD Idonliffled SpedslFlood HouSird Am?No Yn Conwporva #avoroble or unfavorable Includling any apparerd ad -Se easements, crother adyem condiflons): 7b= wer: no a==tadv= russessments. encroachments. 29r,181 or slide at= no JaLik�� that would negatively affect VaZ= V of the subject is typical of the neighborhood. A title report was not nrovided as part of this assignment. he The undersigned has recited (tree record sales of ptopent"s Most SWIM and Proximate to subject and has considered those In the inarkof analysis, rM description Indu ale T The description - doe CIO let ad;uslpront relleCift market reaction to those norm of "W""Con't Variation bal"an "he 3"10d om comparable PmWID& 0 A significant Ism In the cornparlbil comparable r7 �hs :_,. property Is superior to or rmto favorable than the Subject property, a nims (-) adjustment to mods plus reducing the Indicated I of subject: R a sig"Icant Mom In he Stiff is thate cornparsibis is interior to or Ism favorablo, than the au"J"s luol'sny, A plus 0) AgurorrAll W MACIS it= kwelskV it* Indimled Volvo of the auSpied, of he SUBJECT PROPERTY �CMPAW�LENOI COMPARABLE NO2 COMPARABLE NO2 Address 183XX 80th Avenue West 7421 Meadowdale Beach Road 156XX 72nd Avenue West 87XX Olympic View Drive EdmondsI Edmonds Edmonds I Edmonds Proxinitty to SUbIW �M' I , Mile Northeast MW , ; 'MLffi ) r s 96,550 2Miles North .5 Mile Northwest 80000 Sale$ Prices NIA Ruc foot - N/A jisnsp VM22MM=$ 3,96 Ngjgj��'Y:�Ms 6-0 11 2,40 OataPrice! ection.M S Rv:#9702240229 - 7---. ---*,r---: Metro MLS ea Rec#9 607020177,Metro MLS Rec#96 Metro Mu Dale of S$la end DESCAIPI'ION DESCRIPTION -- ... I DESCRIPTION d DESCRIPTION NIA Febru 24 1997 July 7,1996 AU 19 1996 Loatlon Average e Avem e Avers e • skemew 28,750 SF/Terr �Avera 24.394 SF/Tenr IT 13,068 SF/Fair Sad Simil 33 302 SF*/Fair Snd -5 00C Utilities avaflabli ElemWaterSewer Elec Water Sewer ElectwatmSewer MeCL)VaterSewer Preliminary worl! None known Topo,Geo,SurvP G S YJ 15.000 -15.000 None known r4one known Sake or Flrwwinp N/A Cash Cash Cash cancoattona N/A None noted None noted None noted Plus X Minus s IM, 15 0 Plus X Minus s -5 Indicated Value at Subject Coment. on Maker Data 71r: adjusted value for each Of the ComparableS have been rounded to ft nearest $1,000. The indicated _c`5 dale for each of the comparables is the close of escrow clam. *Site size of Comnarable No, 3 is estimated by using Metros 12P calculation section doe w the lack of site size information on Snohomish County records. This estimate does not refute an acme) site survey, Com of Appraisal: The subject is artOraised "As Is" and is not subject to any repairs, al in tions. A title ;11.==ed as Van Of this rePOrL NO 2MOR81 DRYperty was included in this valuation. IESTIMATE THE MARKET ALOE, ASD INE0,017SUSIEVIOROPE]ITYASOF March 10 IS 97 iohs 81,000 I Apprai3or(s) Appraised (I aRpk4"*) Henry I Did Kleneker Did Old Nd Phys" inspect Property MACAppralsorru Real 1:31218 Appraisal SolhVM by Bradford and Robbins (NO) QZ8727. EXHIBIT 3 0 71- IhWim ME t _ , �?',i Snohomish County Assessor's Office 4 Gail S. Rauch Q CountyAssessor Cindy S. Portmann Chief Deputy Cj a CERTIFICATE OF SUFFICIENCY WS #510 3000 Rockefeller Avenue � ; Everett, WA 98201-4046 u. (206)388-3433 0. w a I, ran _. , Snohomish County Deputy Assessor, in accordan a with the requirements of RCW 35A.01.040, W hereby certify that the Petition for c 1Ky- ��I,„�n,r J:Qu, ��. z submitted to the Assessor on \8 Ig9t, is signed by the W, owners of property comprising !oa e of the total assessed value W o',, within the area described in the petition, according to the records of o the Snohomish County Assessor. The determination of sufficiency ' W w was begun on _ \,W lq%. Dated this 74"' day of Qc - , 199 tom. N� z ~ By Deputy Assessor 0 RECEIVED C C T - 9 1996 EDMONDS CITY CLERK recycled paper t5 777 RECEIVED r - PETITION FOR STREET OR ALLEY VACATION J U L 1 7 1996 EDMONDS CITY CLERK TO THE HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS; WASHINGTON WE, the undersigned, owners of two-thirds of the real property abutting 2 on that public right-of-way described below, do hereby Petition the City of Edmonds to vacate said public right-of-way, described as follows: all situate in the City of Edmonds,'County of Snohomish, State of Washington, and request that said City Council by,Resolution fix a time and place when this Petition shall be heard and determined by that authority, which time shall not be more than sixty (60) days nor less than twenty (20) days after the passage of such Resolution. These pages are a group of pages containing an identical text and prayer intended by the signers of this Petition to be presented and considered as one Petition and may be filed with other pages containing additional signatures which cumulatively may be considered as a single Petition. WARNING: Every person who signs this Petition with any other than his true name, or who knowingly signs more than one of these Petitions, or signs W petition seeking an election when he is not a legal voter or signs a petitio6 when he is otherwise not qualified to*sign, or who makes herein any false statement, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. - PRAYER OF PETITION: For the vacation of Am4 IVxrelo"6 2. 3. 5. 4. 6. 7. 8, 9. 10: 11. 12. 13. 14. *See special instructions on cover sheet. 10/22/84 z' — w'. wU �U UO � O Ua wLu J Ha U) LL Lu �1 w LL =� S2 d, H x' z E- �. o z ww � CJ T Cw} LLO -z U O� z o 1 t 0 HAN Z. PARK - PRD LEGAL DESCRIPTION - PORTIONS OF 184TH STREET SW & OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE TO BE VACATED THAT PORTION OF OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE AND 184TH STREET SW ADJOINING LOT 9 AND 10 BLOCK 1 ADMIRALTY ACRES ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 12 OF PLATS PAGE 48 RECORDS OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY WASHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 9; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT 9 ALONG A CURVE TO THE LEFT HAVING A RADIUS OF 613.70 FEET AN ARC DISTANCE OF 26.63 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE S 00 59' 20" E ALONG SAID EAST LINE 50.00 FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT IN THE WEST LINE OF SAID OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE AND THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THIS DESCRIPTION: THENCE ALONG SAID WEST LINES 81 ° 00' 40" W 10.00 FEET, S 8059' 20" E 70.00 FEET; S 810 00' 40" W 10.00 FEET, S 8059' 20" E 175.15 FEET TO THE NORTH LINE OF 184TH STREET SW; THENCE N 890 07' 51" W ALONG SAID NORTH LINE 242.66 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 10; THENCE S 33004' 19" E 24.11 FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID STREET; THENCE S 89007' 51" E ALONG SAID SOUTH IzINE 252.98 FEET TO A POINT WHICH BEARS S 80 59' 20" E FROM THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE N 80 59' 20" W, PARALLEL WITH SAID OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE 269.06 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. �0 WA�{{ x fr 19343 EXPIRE$ 2/24/97 w TO: Jeff Wilson, Planning Supervisor Sandra S. Chase, City Clerk City of Edmonds FROM: W. Scott Snyder, Office of the City Attorney RE: Vacation Petition Enclosed is a letter which I wrote to the Assessor's Office. While their position is nonsensical and hypertechnical, it does make sense in Iight of the wording of RCW 35A.01.040 Sufficiency of Petition. That section states at subparagraph 7: Signatures, including the original, of any person who signed a petition two or more times should be stricken. The easiest thing may be just to have either Mr. Park or his wife sign separate petitions for each property and vacation. Please note that Section 9(a) governing signatures by owners of property states that: The signature of a record owner, as determined by the records of the county auditor, shall be sufficient without the signature of his or her spouse;" WSS/gjz Enclosure WSS120240.I WF0006.900000 M Wenatchee Office • One South Chelan Street • P.O. Box 1606 - Wenatchee, WA 98807 - (509) 662-1954 • Fax (509) 663.1553 r W = �v �0 to 0 W J ♦— Ln 0! it u. D �a =W �- z z l- 1- O z�- W? �o 0- oN LLJ = U �a -' z LU cr ca s O� z f" 13 A P. L. L. C. ATTORNEYS AT L A W 2100 Westlake Center Tower - 1601 Fifth Avenue • Seattle, WA 98101-1686 • (206) 447.7000 • Fax (206) 447.0215 W. Scott Snyder October 1, 1996 Snohomish County Assessor's Office County Administration Building Auditor's Office, First Floor 3000 Rockefeller Avenue MIS 204 Everett, WA 98201-4046 Re: City of Edmonds/Vacation Petitions Dear Sir or Madam: Sandra Chase, City Clerk for Edmonds, has passed on your concern that the petition submitted for the vacation of property on Olympic View Drive and 184th Street S.W. in the City of Edmonds violates the state statutory provision (RCW 35A.01.040(7)} requiring the invalidation of petition signatures when an individual signs more than once. The City of Edmonds as an alternative code city is bound by the provisions of chapter 35.79 RCW. RCW 35.79.010 requires vacation petitions to be "... signed by the owners of more than two thirds of the property abutting that part of the street or alley sought to be vacated..." Because of the statutory language, the City has the practice of obtaining the owners' signatures separately for each property. It was thought that this would enable your office to more easily ascertain whether the required that two thirds of the owners of property have signed. This approach is consistent with RCW 35A.01.040(4) which distinguishes "electors" from "property owners". This issue will be even more acute and potentially confusing with respect to petitions to initiate local improvement districts. There again, individual property owners have more than "one vote". They have as many votes as their proportional interest through their property bears to the total area of the district. In other words, there will be several situations under state law when owners of property are required to sign more than once in order to exercise their rights with respect to a specific pieces of property. Wenatchee Office • One South Chelan Street • P.O. Box 1606 • Wenatchee, WA 98807 • (509) 662-1954 • Fax (509) 663.1553 W. U'i LL i WO: � a� LL T �t = W' z I=— t— O W W' as U U?1 p HI LLp _z w(n U = Z t0 Snohomish County Assessor's Office October 1, 1996 Page 2 A specific example may help you understand the City's problem (and yours when you review the petitions). Assume that John Jones and Bob Smith own tract A and John Jones and Jane Doe. own tract B. Assume also that their ownership is governed by a trust or other document requiring that both owners or trustees sign documents with respect to the property. Given your interpretation, there is no way in that situation in which those property owners could qualify their property for a local improvement district, an annexation or street vacation. Both owners would be required to sign with respect to both properties but your policy would require that their signatures be rejected as duplicative. This obviously is not an appropriate result, nor one which the legislature intended when enacting the limitations preventing individuals from multiple signatures I would be happy to discuss this matter with you or the assistant prosecuting attorney with whom you work at your convenience. We hope you will develop policies distinguishing multiple signatures by electors from situations where persons are signing more than once but each signature relates to ownership of a particular parcel of property. Very truly yours, O MURPHY WALLACE W. Scott Sn r WSS1gjZ cc: Sandra S. Chase Jeff Wilson wssiovua.ISUO e.sM to CITY OF EDMONDS BARbARA rAHEY MAYOR 250 5TH AVENUE NORTH - EDMONDS, WA 98020 - (206) 771.0220 - FAX (206) 771-0221 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT Public Works • Planning 0 Parks and Recreation • Engineering Letter of Transmittal Date: September 27, 1996 To: Charles Maki 8235 Talbot Rd. Edmonds, WA 98026 Subject: ST-96-77 & ST-96-78 Transmitting Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law For Your Information: XX As you requested: For your file: Comment: Note attachments: Sincerely, Diane M. Cunningham, Administrative Assistant • Incorporated August 11, 1890 0 Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan Z W •{ w L) J U UO u) 0. LU w LU `n o LU�k w �s D zw z� �0 ww �o U —1 a�- F- ti p —z LUCn U S o� z U 9E u BEFORE THE EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL Consolidated Hearing Application of Charles Maki to vacate unused right-of-way lying west of Olympic View Drive north of 184th Street, to amend the official street map to remove plan lined rights -of -way of 184th Street S.W. 253 feet of right-of-way of 184th Street S.W., to vacate public right-of-way between Olympic View Drive and 76th Avenue W. and an approximately 10 to 20-foot-wide portion of the public right-of-way on the west side of Olympic View Drive north of 184th Street. File No.: ST-96-77, ST-96-78 PROCEDURAL HISTORY This matter came on for a consolidated hearing before the Edmonds City Council on September 3, 1996. Applications to amend the City's official street map to remove 60-foot right-of-way between Olympic View Drive and 80th Avenue W. commencing just north of 184th Street S.W., to vacate an unopened portion of a 20-foot-wide public right-of-way line between Olympic View Drive and approximately 176th Avenue W. and to vacate approximately 10 to 20-foot-wide portion of the public right-of-way located on the west side of Olympic View Drive running north approximately 184th Street S.W. for approximately 270 feet, were combined with an application to amend the City's official street map to remove plan lined 60-foot-wide right-of- way between Olympic View Drive and 80th Avenue W. starting just north of 184th Street S.W., reduce the plan lined right-of-way for 184th Street S.W. commencing at Olympic View Drive westerly for approximately 253 feet, and to remove a plan lined right-of-way lying west of Olympic View Drive and north of 184th Street S.W. All the proposed requests are located either adjacent to or across the following property addresses: 7704 Olympic View Drive, 18325 80th Avenue W., and 18408 79th Pl. W. This decision is based upon the record before the Edmonds City Council and the record and recommendation of the City's Hearing Examiner. The recommendations of the Hearing Examiner dated July 26, 1996, are adopted as the Council's findings and conclusions except as specifically amended herein. ADDITIONAL TESTIMONY AND INFORMATION At the City Council hearing, the staff recommendation was amended and differed from that presented to the Hearing Examiner. The Hearing Examiner in his findings at page 10, recommendation 4, recommends denial of the request to remove from the official street map of the plan lined right-of-way adjacent to Olympic View Drive. Staff recommended to the City Council that, in conjunction with the platting process, the City's interest of providing slope stability could be achieved through the creation of a native growth protection easement for slope n• stability rather than a full taking of the property as right-of-way. The purpose for the additional right-of-way was to control vegetation on the slope to enhance stability and that same objective can be achieved through the less intrusive means of a native growth protection easement. � fl i Z. In the course of the hearings, the applicant acknowledged his willingness to await final g' approval of the vacations and street map amendment until such time as development approval W for the property located at 7704 Olympic View Drive, 18325 80th Avenue W. and 18408 79th U o' a Pl. W. is finally granted. The exact location of interior streets, connections and other required V) LU mitigations cannot be finally ascertained until such approvals are complete. LU X. Ln o ( CONCLUSIONS LU C2 The Edmonds City Council therefore concludes that the purposes and objectives of the Tdl. Edmonds Community Development Code will be met by: =w! z r 1. Amendment of the Official Street Map to delete the plan line for 60 feet of right- 0 of -way between Olympic View Drive and 80th Avenue W. in accordance with W w Exhibit A, Attachment 5, to the Hearing Examiner's recommendation. v (n'. o—; 2. Amendment of the Official Street Map to delete the plan lined extension of 184th t a ��, Street S.W. lying east of the proposed plat road, retaining any existing utility easement and to maintain future provisions for utilities. See Exhibit A, r= Attachment 5, to the Hearing Examiner's recommendation. u. O, — z 3. Deny amendment of the official street map to delete the plan lined extension of I 184th St. S.W. lying west of the proposed plat road. In conjunction with the z subdivision and development approval for the subject property, that section of right-of-way may be required to be widened and relocated to accommodate a future 184th St. S.W. street extension between the unopened right-of-way south of lot 11 and the future plat road. f 4. Approval of the amendment of the official street map to remove 20 feet of right- - - of -way adjacent to Olympic View Drive contingent upon: a. Approval of a 20-foot-wide native growth protection easement along the O applicant's frontage along Olympic View Drive, the extent and nature of which will be determined as a part of the platting approval process. b. The provision to the City within 21 calendar days to the date of approval of a legal description for the native growth protection easement. t O C. The payment of compensation for the vacated property in accordance with the submitted appraisal adjusted in accordance with provisions of state law and City ordinance. 2 t 0 S. The future application to develop the property owned by the applicant is and shall be subject to all applicable requirements contained in the Edmonds Community Development Code. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to ensure compliance with the various provisions contained in those ordinances. Nothing herein shall be interpreted to prejudge or limit the discretion of the City Council in reviewing such application(s) to finally determine the placement and appropriate route of interior roads and utilities and to mitigate the impacts, if any, from the development. In order to provide for a orderly process, the City Council directs that the City Attorney prepare ordinances for vacation and ordinances amending the official street map. These ordinances shall be held and presented to the City Council only in conjunction with an approved development plan providing for adequate alternative connections for roads, pedestrian and bike ways, and utilities in the area. Part of the City Council's required Findings and Hearing Examiner's Recommendations regarding the proposed vacations and amendments to the Official Street Map are a finding that the actions are in accordance with the policies of the Comprehensive Plan and the provisions of the Community Development Code. This finding is based in part upon the assumption that future access will be provided during development of the property. Therefore, it is inappropriate to finally adopt ordinances of vacation or amending the Master Street Map until such time as a platting or other development process makes provision for access. DONE this 27th day of September 1996. Mayor Barbara S. Fahey Attest: Sandra S. Chase, City Clerk WSS143050AXIODOM5071 0 Ord.3113 Council Lion Z If d Ord.3114 Z- � FotestGlen l - W Ann"atioa Arcs Q � LLI J U Ord 3115 U 0 Amend U) LU stred Map t/) File ST-9&72 to LLi LU J� LL < { lFindingsof Fad/Fite d = w ' ST-W77 do ST-96.7g Z h- 1... O Z LULU � O 0 0 �1' Bids -Roof Replacement j—Pi LU LU�1 u- O Z: Library Pfau Planter Project O Z Surplus Rump Truck (G) (ED i ORDINANCE NO. 3113 AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 3110, SECTION 2, TO LIMIT" THE INCREASE IN COMPENSATION TO MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL ELECTED ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 2000 ORDINANCE NO.3114 AMENDING ORDINANCE NO.3054 TO CORRECT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR THE FOREST GLEN ANNEXATION AREA (1) ORDINANCE NO. 3115 AMENDING THE CITY'S OFFICIAL STREET MAP TO DELETE PLAN LINED RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR 88TH AVENUE WEST SHOWN AS APPROXIMATELY 60 FEET IN WIDTH ON THE EXISTING OFFICIAL STREET MAP BETWEEN 218TH STREET W AND 220TH STREET SW, AND APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW REGARDING A HEARING HELD ON AUGUST 20,1996 ON THIS MATTER. (Applicant: Richard and Nancy Hale / Fite No. ST-96-72) (J) APPROVAL OF CONSOLIDATED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW PERTAINING TO CONCURRENT APPLICATIONS TO AMEND THE CITY'S OFFICIAL STREET MAP (FILE NO. ST-96-77) AND VACATE CERTAIN PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY IN THE VICINITY OF OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE AND 184TH STREET SOUTHWEST (FILE NO. ST-96-78). THE SUBJECT PROPERTY INVOLVED INCLUDE: 7704 OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE, 18325 80TH AVENUE WEST, AND 18408 79TH PLACE WEST. (Applicant: Charles Maki / File Nos. ST-96-77 and ST-96-71# (K) REPORT ON BIDS OPENED SEPTEMBER 3, 1996 FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE ROOF REPLACEMENT OF THE EDMONDS LIBRARY, EDMONDS MUSEUM AND NEW CITY HALL BUILDING, AND AWARD OF CONTRACT TO T.B.W.P. GENERAL CONTRACTORS ($25,263.25 INCLUDING SALES TAX) (L) REPORT ON FINAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS FOR THE LIBRARY PLAZA PLANTER REHABILITATION PROJECT AND COUNCIL ACCEPTANCE OF PROJECT ' (M) DECLARING UNIT 87, A 1978 FORD DUMP TRUCK ASSIGNED TO THE WATER/SEWER SECTION, SURPLUS AND AUTHORIZATION TO SELL AT THE JAMES MURPHY AUCTION COMPANY COUNCIL PRESIDENT EARLING MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MYERS, FOR APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS B AND F. MOTION CARRIED, -- . COUNCILMEMBER PETRUZZI ABSTAINED. Items approved are as follows: Approve (B) APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 16,1996 Minutes ® (F) ORDINANCE NO.3112 ESTABLISHING NEW ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES FOR ord.3112 THE PROCESSING OF PROJECT PERMIT APPLICATIONS AS REQUIRED BY THE Regulatory REGULATORY REFORM ACT, CHAPTER 36.70E RCW, INCLUDING NOTICE AND TIMELINE REQUIREMENTS, CONSOLIDATED PERMIT PROCESSING AND AMENDED JUDICIAL APPEAL PROCEDURES Resignation 2a. RESIGNATION OF POLICE CHIEF TOM MILLER of Policc I 0 Chief Mayor Fahey announced that Chief Miller presented his resignation, and reasons for his decision, to her on Monday at 5:00 p.m. After thorough discussions with Chief Miller, she regrettably accepted his resignation. The Council was advised shortly before the Council meeting began. City Council Approved Minutes Septcmber24,1996 Page 2 W w J UO V)a LU wx J f'- Cna LUr LQ �C1 za x z_ t- {— 0 zF LULU c cn or LULL x c: wC _Z LU U _ o z Item #: EIDMONDS CITY COUNCIL Agenda Memo Originator. Planning Division For Action: X For Information: Subject: APPROVAL OF CONSOLIDATED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW PERTAINING TO CONCURRENT APPLICATIONS TO AMEND THE CITY'S OFFICIAL STREET MAP (FILE NO. ST-96-77) AND VACATE CERTAIN PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY IN THE VICINITY OF OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE AND 18TH STREET SOUTHWEST (FILE NO. ST-96-78). THE SUBJECT PROPERTY INVOLVED INCLUDE: 7704 OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE, 18325 80TH AVENUE WEST AND 18408 79TH PLACE WEST. (APPLICANT: CHARLES MAKI / FILE NOS. ST-96-77 & ST-96-78) Agenda Time: Consent Agenda Date: September 24, 1996 Exhibits Attached: 1- Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law 2. Draft Council Minutes for 9/3/96 Clearances: Department/initials Admin Svcs/Finance _ Community Svcs City Attorney Engineering City Clerk Parks & Rec Court Planning)&�p Personnel Public Works Fire. Treatment Plant Police City Council Mayor Reviewed by Council Nuance Committee: community Services Public Safety Approved for Consent Agenda: Recommend Review by Full Council: expenditure Amount Appropriation Required: $ 0 Budgeted: $ 0 Required: $ 0 Funding Source: Not applicable. Previous Council Action: do September 3, 1996, the Council held a consolidated public hearing on two requests by the applicant for in amendment to the City Official Street Map and to vacate existing dedicated public right-of-way. After consideration of both requests, the Council approved the applications subject to certain conditions (see Exhibit 2). 00'10d96 THU MOT PAZ 206 441 021E MEN MURPHY WALLACE To t BEFORE TM EDMONDS CITY COUNCEL W a. Consolidated hearing Application of Charles Maki to vacate unused right -of --way lying west of Olympic View Dri�tc north of 184th Street, to amend the official street map w remove plan lined rights of --way of 184th Street S.W. 253 feet of right -of --way of 184th Street S.W., to vacate �, tn public rigiat-of-way between C?lympic view Drive and 76th Avenue W. and an approximately 10 to 2U-foot-wide portion of the public right of --way on the west side of Olympic �tiew Drive Ln w � LU 0 ; north of 184th Street. ¢m =3 File No.: ST-96-77, ST-96-79 LL_: _U = z t- This matter came an for a consolidated hearing before the Edmonds City Council on �_ o z September 3, 1996. Applications to amend the City's official street map to remove 6o-foot w right-of-way between Olympic View Drive and Wth Avenue W. commencing just north of 184th o o O —b' Street S.W., to vacate an unopened portion of a 20-foot-wide public Tight -of -way line between 176th Avenue W. and to vacate approximately 10 to o� LU R Olympic View Drive and approximately 20-foot-wide portion of the public right-ofway located on fife west side of Olympic View Drava X CO ` running north approximately Ig4th Street S.W. for approximately 270 feet, were combined with an application to amend the City's official street map to remove plan lined 60-foot wide right -of 80th Avenue W. starting just north of 184th Street S.W,, �-' s way between Olympic View Drive and reduce the plan Lined right-of-way for 184th Street S.W. commencing at Olympic View Drive a lined right-of-way lying west of z ~ westerly for approximately 253 feet, and to remove plan Olympic View Drive and north of 184th Street S.W. All the proposed requests are located 'anew either adjacent to or across the following property addresses: 7704 Olympic Drive, 18325 8tlth Avenue W., and 18408 79th Pl. W. This decision is based upon the record before the Edmonds City Council and the record and recommendation of the City's Hearing Examiner. The recommendations of the Dearing _._ . Exaitiincr dated July 26, 1996, are adopted as the Council's findings and conclusions except as 4 specifically amended herein. i A?'DIT1f} AI. T S�Tlm—O AZM MQB A 'OOlri t0 At the City Council hearing, the staff recommendation was amended and differed from that presented to the Bearing Examiner. The Hearing Examiner in his findings at page 10, recommendation 41 recommends denial of the request to remove from the official street map of the plan lined right-of-way adjacent to Olympic View Drive. Staff recommended to the City Council that, in conjunction with the platting process, the City's interest of providing slope stability could be achieved through the creation of a native growth protection easement for slope -1- s Q 002 E6 W J �- Cn tL! LU (� Q ml at z t- 1-o z w W c� m oLU ~ = U H� u- O _z wm c3 _ a~ z t® stability rather than a full taking of the property as right-of-way. The purpose for the additional right-of-way was to control vegetation on the slope to enhance stability and that came objective can be achieved through the less intrusive means of a native growth protection easement, In the course of the hearings, the applicant acknowledged his willingness to await final approval of the vacations and street map amendment until such time as development approval for the property located at 7704 Olympic View Drive, 18325 Stith Avenue W. and 18408 79th Pl. W, is finally granted. The exact location of interior streets, connections and other required mitigations cannot be finally ascertained until such approvals are complete. The Edmonds City Council therefore concludes that the purposes and objectives of the Edmonds Community Development Code will be met by: 1. Amendment of the Official Street Map to delete the plan line for 60 feet of right - of -wary between Olympic View Drive and 80th Avenue W. in accordance with Exhibit A, Attachracnt 5, to the Hearing Examiner's recommendation. 2. Amendment of the Official Street Map to delete the plan lined extension of 184th Street S.W. lying east of the proposed plat road, retaining any cacisting utility easement and to maintain future provisions for utilities. See Exhibit A, Attachment 5, to the Hearing Examiner's recommendation. 3. Deny amendment of the official street map to delete the plan lined extension of 184th St. S.W. lying west of the proposed plat road, in conjunction with the subdivision and development approval for the subject property, that section of night -of -way may be required to be widened and relocated to accommodate a future 184th St. S.W. street extension between the unopened right-of-way south of lot 11 and the future plat road. 4. Approval of the amendment of the official street trap to remove 20 feet of right- of-way adjacent to Olympic View Drive contingent upon: a. Approval of a 20-foot-wide native growth protection easement along the applicant's frontage along Olympic View Drive, the extent and nature of which will be determined as a part of the platting approval process. b. The provision to the City within 21 calendar days to the elate of approval of a legal description for the native growth protection easement. a. The payment of compensation for the vacated property in accordance with the submitted appraisal adjusted in accordance with provisions of state law ,and City ordinance. W41 a] { '00/19/90 TIVU 13:00 FAX 200 4 0213 OGDEN NORM WALLACE � � 004 y,r S. The future application to develop the property owned by the applicant is and shall be subject to all applicable requirements contained in the Edmonds Community Development Code. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to ensure compliance with the various provisions contained in those ordinances. Nothing herein shall be interpreted to prejudge or limit the discretion of the City CounO in reviewing such application(s) to finally determine the placement and appropriate route of interior roads and utilities and to mitigate the impacts, if any, from the development. � � l In order to provide for a orderly process, the City Council directs that the City Attorney WU. j prepare ordinances for vacation and ordinances amending the official street map. These g ordinances shall be held and presented to the City Council only in conjunction with an approved development plan providing for adequate alternative connections for roads. pedestrian and bike LL <( ways, and utilities in the area, Part of the City Council's required Findings and Hearing Examiner's Recommendations regarding the proposed vacations and amendments to the Offiieiial T ' Street Map are a finding that the actions are in accordance with the policies of the z I-- Comprehensive Plan and the provisions of the Community Development Code. This finding is z o based in part upon the assumption that future access will be provided during development of the LU � property. Therefore, it is inappropriate to finally adopt ordinances of vacation or amending the :D 0 Master Street Map until such time as a platting or other development process makes provision U tn. o — for access. i u ; DONE this, day of ; 1996. — z; ui tn! oMayor Barbara S. Fahey z Attest: Sandra, S. Chase, City Clerk wea430ro.IX"KIN71 .g_ A (1 Over the past several months, I have come to believe several things. One, the likelihood of the ferry terminal moving to the Point Edwards site in the next 15-20 years is very remote. I am in favor of such a move, but I am afraid the funding is not there to make the move in the foreseeable future. z Ij Safety for citizens that walk, bicycle and drive in our City, as well as for ferry passengers, must be the _ Z , LU number one concern. This has been my issue all along. The increasing number of trains that pass through Edmonds every day adds to our concerns for safety. Nothing in the proposed overhead loading :) project addresses the issue of safety for vehicles, passengers or disabled individuals on the way to and Ufrom o the ferry dock. I do not want to paint the Ferry System as the evil party in this situation. They are U) not opposed to a multimodal site at Point Edwards, but their main responsibility is to provide the best LUJ level of service that they can for their passengers. They feel they can load more passengers and vehicles U) LL t in a shorter span of time with overhead loading than they can without overhead loading. They want to do UJ so as soon as possible. Finally, I believe the overhead loading ramp will be built. David doesn't slay Goliath very often, Angola �v doesn't beat the Dream Team and a single entity like our City doesn't stand very much of a chance _ against the Ferry System. But I feel the issue of safety must be addressed now, so while this motion is Zwhat I call a watered-down attempt, I am still not very happy with the fact that we have not addressed the r_ o safety of people in their ride to and from the ferry dock. z ww a MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. O —r o F= ' COUNCIL PRESIDENT EARLING MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCELMEMBER VAN "U HOLLEBEKE, THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY PREPARE A DRAFT RESOLUTION CHARGING S U' THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL TO TAKE A LEADERSHIP RESPONSIBILITY IN FORMING A PARTNERSHIP TO RESOLVE THE ,DANGEROUS AT -GRADE ISSUES RELATED TO THE FERRY, RAILROAD, BUS, AUTO, BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC W U) AT THE INTERSECTION OF RAILROAD AVENUE AND MAIN STREET. POTENTIAL PARTNERS FOR THE PARTNERSHIP SHALL INCLUDE, BUT MAY NOT BE LIMITED TO, f THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD, REGIONAL TRANSIT AUTHORITY, AMTRAK, AND THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AGENCIES RELATED TO HIGHWAYS, FERRIES AND RAILROADS. MOTION CARRIED. COUNCILMEMBER PETRUZZI MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MYERS, TO i INSTRUCT THE COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTOR TO IMMEDIATELY BEGIN { WORKING ON OBTAINING A WRITTEN AGREEMENT AMONG THE APPROPRIATE ,. AGENCIES TO WORK TOGETHER IN ORDER THAT A GRADE -SEPARATED PEDESTRIAN f WALKWAY BECOMES A REALITY. THE DIRECTOR IS REQUIRED TO MAKE UPDATE REPORTS TO THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING THE AGREEMENT AND RESULTING 0 PLANS AND WORKS ON THE WALKWAY AT A MINIMUM OF EVERY 60 DAYS. MOTION CARRIED. A five minute break was taken. 5. HEARING ON A REQUEST TO AMEND THE CITY'S OUJC1AL 5MU , T MAP TO Fn"'= THAT PORTION OF A PROPOSE._. 60-FOOT WIDF. Ri =TTT_nE_wev DESIGNATION BETWEEN OLYN21C VIEW DRTVF ANT} A11TA ev�t.TTT��em STARTING JUST NORTIi �r r 0 1 RATU CTDT', r rr CnTTg1MX Q1r Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes September 3,1996 Page 8 EXHIBIT 2 O zZ i- W wV -JO U !a U)w UH to LL wQ Dar xw Z tm- l.-O Z� W mg :Do U U) a F—, S V` LL O Z ui (n U S Z t0 Cl- . r: _ :t Y.. / , :►1r •1: Y0, . .,. :, is u_ �. Scott Snyder, City Attorney, at staffs request, informed the Mayor and Council that Item 6 on the agenda was a related matter and much of the material is the same. He stated that it would be possible to combine both hearings, as long as separate specific motions were made for each hearing issue. Council President Earling stated that a combined hearing would be agreeable as long as when staff refers to the second hearing, they make note of the fact that it is Item 6. Mayor Fahey asked if any of the Councilmembers had anything to declare. Councilmember Haakenson stated that he did not know the applicant, .nor many of the details of this request, but his business is located kitty-corner on Olympic View Drive and that some of the questions he might ask would be due to his location. Mayor Fahey announced that Mr. Maki, is a friend of her family and that she is aware of the project, but has no vested interest in it. Councilmember Van Hollebeke stated that he knew Mr. Maki but had no previous conversations regarding this project. Scott Snyder, City Attorney, asked Councilmember Haakenson if he owned or leased his business property. Councilmember Haakenson stated that he does lease the property. Mr. Snyder stated that a proximity to a zoning request was enough to raise the Appearance of Fairness Doctrine, if a person had an ownership interest and could thereby benefit. Mayor Fahey set the parameters for the combined hearings and discussed the timelines given to all participants. Jeff Wilson, Current Planning Supervisor, stated that there are two files: ST 96-77, which is a request to amend the City's official street map; and ST-96-78, which is a request to vacate a portion of public right - Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes September 3,1996 page 9 C of -way. Mr. Wilson presented an overhead to Council to help explain the requests to the Council. The first request is amending the official street map and that is the action which must be considered first, before the Council can vacate a portion of right-of-way. Mr. Wilson reviewed with Council the area surrounding the proposed changes, and exactly what the applicant was requesting, as well as what streets z fi ' or areas would be effected. Mr. Wilson stated that at the hearing held by the Hearing Examiner, a great w, deaf of the testimony had to do with residents' concern over having linkage between 80th and Olympic View Drive. Mr. Wilson referred to the street vacation (ST-96-78) that was also being requested and stated that in the packet there was an appraisal of the existing right-of-way with a value set at $15,000. Mr. Wilson reviewed with the Council those areas that would be considered acceptable to vacate and Ln-J a w areas where the City would continue to retain right-of-way. --1 1' Mr. Wilson clarified that as part of Item 5, the City would be able to provide the same insurance for the wo slope stability along Olympic View Drive through the use of native vegetation, which was not discussed g at the Hearing Examiner's hearing. What the Planning Department is suggesting is that under (ST-96- 77) the Lt condition #4 of the Hearing Examiner's decision be eliminated and require that the applicant provide a 20-foot wide easement running parallel to Olympic View Drive from the North to the z w z X Southeast roe that would provide sloe stability throe h native g property m' p P t3' g growth vegetation. Mr. Wilson outlined how, with future development, there be linkage 1.- a could with 80th to Olympic View Drive and that due to the topography, finding the right alignment for this connection has always been an issue in trying Z w LU to develop the property. U m c.> m;., Scott Snyder, City Attorney, informed the Council of a recent case by the Washington Court of Appeals, a - ; which is binding, and states the Council does not have the authority, to require a developer to either w LU = v + dedicate or develop, a road within the development solely for the purpose of providing access for adjacent property owners. E— F., w p Z: Councilmember Myers inquired as to whether there would be sufficient right-of-way along Olympic View Drive for future needs. Mr. Wilson stated that there is sufficient right-of-way to handle future i-- needs and the portion of the dedicated right-of-way that the City would be giving up, is for protection of Z the slope and not widening of the street. Mr. Wilson reviewed the request summarized in Item 6 with Council regarding the vacating of the unused 20-foot right-of-way and areas that would be retained. Mr. Wilson recommended that the Council acknowledge the intent to vacate the areas and then direct staff to go back and prepare the i appropriate resolution approving the intent to vacate, including the appropriate legal descriptions. Mr. j Wilson then reviewed the actions necessary by the applicant and that they will need to provide in their IegaI description of the property, the 20-foot wide easement for slope stability, adjacent to Olympic View ` Drive, to offset the dedication of right-of-way. They will also need to provide the City with a new legal . description showing the areas to be vacated which can be incorporated in the appropriate resolution. Q Staff would then bring the resolution back on a consent agenda for adoption. The additional conditions would call for the applicant to pay the funds indicated in the appraisal, which was $15,000. He explained that since the City would not be taking the total area, after receiving the legal descriptions, some of the cost would be reduced proportionately, and that estimate would also be brought back for Council approval. Charles Maki, 8235 Talbot Road, Edmonds, Mr. Maki informed the Council that he was representing Dr. t b and Mrs. Han Park and does not have any ownership in the project. Mr. Maki stated that it is their intention to subdivide the property on a planned residential basis and would be following all the necessary steps. Mr. Maki reviewed the steps that had been taken as well as the original request for Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes September 3,1996 Page 16 t 0 H 0 %l' vacation and the design concepts used in developing a plan for this property. Mr. Maki referred to the Petition signed by 39 neighbors and stated that he had spoken with all the neighbors at the Hearing Examiner's hearing, and that they had changed the plan of the subdivision to incorporate a road through z ii to Olympic View Drive. Mr. Maki agreed that the current proposal before the Council would be _ agreeable to them, and stated that the advantage to the City would be to get a finished street. LU Councilmember Van Hollebeke inquired if Mr. Maki had any conversations with the owner of Lot 11. U0 Mr. Maki informed the Council that Mr- and Mrs. Earl Smith, owners of Lot 11, have a buy -sell agreement m o w with Dr. Park, would like to sell to Dr. Park, and are aware of what is happening. -j t- j Scott Snyder, City Attorney, asked Mr. Maki if during his presentation he had stated that the applicant wp" :E agrees that the amendment of the Street Map with a vacation ordinance would be contingent on developing the dedication of the yet unnamed < street and the dedication of a native growth area. Mr. Maki stated this was correct. Ln d sw. Mayor Fahey opened the audience comment portion of the hearing. 3: z F- Edward B. Swanson, 8111 182nd St. S.W., Edmonds, stated that he would like to see a road through to z o Olympic View Drive. ww o tn} dim Thompson, 18305 80th Ave. W., Edmonds, stated that he owns lot 13, adjacent to the City's o o M property, and the his main concern is getting a way through to Olympic View Drive. He explained that he is concerned about vacating the right-of-way without y v� some assurances that there would be passage from 80th Ave. to Perrinville. Mr. Thompson stated that Mr. Maki's suggestion of a street through on �z 184th would be ideal. v cn Sally Baringer, Heatherglen Lot 12, stated she is very much effected by �- � this and that during the past 10 or 12 years she has received numerous notifications of different proposed actions. Ms. Baringer referred z to the topography of Mr. Smith's property and stated she felt if a road was put in, that this would cause problems with her 30 foot bank. She explained that if the City does develop the road she would request that the bank be rocked. Mayor Fahey inquired if anyone else cared to make comments; hearing none, the Mayor closed the audience portion of the hearing. Councilmember Petruzzi stated that what the staff was proposing made sense to him and that the easement would give the City the control it needed, and in turn, give. the Parks what they needed to be able to develop their property. Councilmember Petruzzi questioned staff about the various areas © involved. COUNCILMEMBER PETRUZZI MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER VAN HOLLEBEKE; ON ITEM NO. 5, FOR THE RECOMMENDED ACTION TO ADOPT THE HEARING EXAMINER'S RECOMMENDATION AND APPROVE THE APPLICATION FOR A STREET MAP AMENDMENT WITH THE CONDITIONS RECOMMENDED BY Tl:•IE HEARING EXAMINER. IN ADDITION, THE APPLICANT SHALL BE REQUIRED, AS PART OF ANY t 0 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION, TO PROVIDE A 40-FOOT WIDE CONNECTION BETWEEN OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE AND HIS PORTION OF 184TH STREET SOUTHWEST (File No. ST- 96-78). MOTION CARRIED. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes September3,1996 Page I i COUNCILMEMBER MYERS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER HAAKENSON, THAT THE COUNCIL ACKNOWLEDGE THE CITY'S INTENT TO VACATE THE UNUSED RIGHT-OF-WAY ALONG OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE AND THE UNOPENED PORTION OF I 184TH STREET SOUTHWEST FROM OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE EAST 253-FEET (File No. ST-96- 77, Hearing Examiner's Decision), SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: z LU 1) REQUIRE THE APPLICANT TO PROVIDE THE CITY WITH A 20-FOOT cc g WIDE NATIVE GROWTH PROTECTION EASEMENT ALONG THE J APPLICANT'S ENTIRE FRONTAGE ON OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE. O 0W 2) THE APPLICANT SHALL PROVIDE A LEGAL DESCRIPTION TO THE CITY WITHIN 21 CALENDAR DAYS. W + U) O g � [ 3) AFTER RECEIVING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION THE CITY COUNCIL SHALL PLACE, ON THE NEXT AVAILABLE CONSENT AGENDA, THE =i x RESOLUTION ADOPTING THIS VACATION. u- Q . to if 0 4) THE APPLICANT SHALL PAY TO THE CITY A SUM AGREED UPON BY THE _ STAFF AND THE APPLICANT FOR THE VACATED PROPERTY. z i- 1,- 0 Scott Snyder, City Attorney, referring to condition #4, brought to Council's attention that state Iaw limits LUL the amount of payback to one half when a person has previously dedicated property to the City. a t=� C) -�0 F,� MOTION CARRIED. w 7. AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SI N STANDARD FORM OF AGREEMENT 'WITH t— V ? ' MERRTT + PARDE AND APPROVAL OF FUNDING Fnu T ESIG r SER-VICES S ON PUBLIC -- (".E� vie ra�__a u. p SAFETY COMPLEX FACILITY - 2 U)' Paul Mar, Community Services Director, reviewed Council's previous actions in advertising, selecting o �` and negotiating a contract with Merrit & Pardini. Mr. Mar reviewed the packet contents and asked for z questions from Council. Councilmember Nordquist asked about Exhibit D. Mr. Mar explained that this is Merritt + Pardini's overhead statement for audit purposes and has nothing to do with the City's contract. i COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCII.MEMBER MYERS, TO 3 APPROVE ITEM 7 AND AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO SIGN STANDARD FORM OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN OWNER AND ARCHITECT WITH MERRITT & PARDINI FOR .+ DESIGN SERVICES ON PUBLIC SAFETY COMPLEX FACILITIES IN THE AMOUNT OF $830,830. MOTION CARRIED, 0 S. DISCUSSION OF FUNDING SOURCE FOR SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT Council President Earling stated that there was a question of the funding source to pay a settlement that had been allocated to Mr. Pearson. City Attorney Snyder reviewed the actions that had brought this legal matter before Council and indicated that a settlement had been entered into, with the Council's approval, and now the money needs to be moved from the Council Contingency Fund so it can be paid. t COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER VAN HOLLEBEKE, TO AUTHORIZE THE STAFF TO SPEND $5,000 FROM THE COUNCIL Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes September 3,1996 Page 12 n =F f— W cc W � U U O � O u? w � to LLi w0 � J U- _ { =w Z i- 1-o ww U (n a ;UJ c- a _Z 11i to Uz o~ Z U M 1 ::1 / :.i I 1 : Scott Snyder, City Attorney, at staffs request, informed the Mayor and Council that Item 6 on the agenda was a related matter and much of the material is the same. He stated that it would be possible to combine both hearings, as long as separate specific motions were made for each hearing issue. Council President Earling stated that a combined hearing would be agreeable as long as when staff refers to the second hearing, they make note of the fact that it is Item 6. .:L:.;.1 1 CIRM14# iE ..' - .� I . -1U_ :_ :.. .. • ..r.. ..� .. - _. 1 eta ... . Mayor Fahey asked if any of the Councilmembers had anything to declare Councilmember Haakenson stated that he did not know the applicant, nor many of the details of this request, but his business is located kitty-corner on Olympic View Drive and that some of the questions he might ask would be due to his location. Mayor Fahey announced that Mr. Maki, is a friend of her family and that she is aware of the project, but has no vested interest in it. Councilmember Van Hollebeke stated that he knew Mr. Maki but had no previous conversations regarding this project. Scott Snyder, City Attorney, asked Councilmember Haakenson if he owned or leased his business property. Councilmember Haakenson stated that he does lease the property. Mr. Snyder stated that a proximity to a zoning request was enough to raise the Appearance of Fairness Doctrine, if a person had an ownership interest and could thereby benefit. Mayor Fahey set the parameters for the combined hearings and discussed the timelines given to all participants. ' Jeff Wilson, Current Planning Supervisor, stated that there are two files: ST-96-77, which is a request to amend the City's official street map; and ST-96-78, which is a request to vacate a portion of public right- of-way. Mr. Wilson presented an overhead to Council to help explain the requests to the Council. The first request is amending the official street map and that is the action which must be considered first, Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes September 3,1996 Page 9 ❑s t0 before the Council can vacate a portion of right-of-way. Mr. Wilson reviewed with Council the area surrounding the proposed changes, and exactly what the applicant was requesting, as well as what streets or areas would be effected. Mr. Wilson stated that at the hearing held by the Hearing Examiner, a great deal of the testimony had to do with residents' concern over having linkage between 80th and Olympic View Drive. Mr. Wilson referred to the street vacation (ST-96-78) that was also being requested and stated that in the packet there was an appraisal of the existing right-of-way with a value set at $15,000. Mr. Wilson reviewed with the Council those areas that would be considered acceptable to vacate and areas where the City would continue to retain right-of-way. Mr. Wilson clarified that as part of Item 5, the City would be able to provide the same insurance for the slope stability along Olympic View Drive through the use of native vegetation, which was not discussed at the Hearing Examiner's hearing. What the Planning Department is suggesting is that under (ST-96- 77) the condition #4 of the Hearing Examiner's decision be eliminated and require that the applicant provide a 20-foot wide easement running parallel to Olympic View Drive from the North to the Southeast property that would provide slope stability through native growth vegetation. Mr. Wilson outlined how, with future development, there could be linkage with 80th to Olympic View Drive and that due to the topography, finding the right alignment for this connection has always been an issue in trying to develop the property. Scott Snyder, City Attorney, informed the Council of a recent case by the Washington Court of Appeals, which is binding, and states the Council does not have the authority to require a developer to either dedicate or develop a road within the development solely for the purpose of providing access for adjacent property owners. Councilmember Myers inquired as to whether there would be sufficient right-of-way along Olympic View Drive for future needs. Mr. Wilson stated that there is sufficient right-of-way to handle future needs and the portion of the dedicated right-of-way that the City would be giving up, is for protection of the slope and not widening'of the street. Mr. Wilson reviewed the request summarized in Item 6 with Council regarding the vacating of the unused 20-foot right-of-way and areas that would be retained. Mr. Wilson recommended that the Council acknowledge the intent to vacate the areas and then direct staff to go back and prepare the appropriate resolution approving the intent to vacate, including the appropriate legal descriptions. Mr. Wilson then reviewed the actions necessary by the applicant and that they will need to provide in their legal description of the property, the 20-foot wide easement for slope stability, adjacent to Olympic View Drive, to offset the dedication of right-of-way. They will also need to provide the City with a new legal description showing the areas to be vacated which can be incorporated in the appropriate resolution. Staff would then bring the resolution back on a consent agenda for adoption. The additional conditions would call for the applicant to pay the funds indicated in the appraisal, which was $15,000. He explained that since the City would not be taking the total area, after receiving the legal descriptions, some of the cost would be reduced proportionately, and that estimate would also be brought back for Council approval. Charles Maki, 8235 Talbot Road, Edmonds, Mr. Maki informed the Council that he was representing Dr. and Mrs. Han Park and does not have any ownership in the project. Mr. Maki stated that it is their intention to subdivide the property on a planned residential basis and would be following all the necessary steps. Mr. Maki reviewed the steps that had been taken as well as the original request for vacation and the design concepts used in developing a plan for this property. Mr. Maki referred to the petition signed by 39 neighbors and stated that he had spoken with all the neighbors at the Hearing Examiner's hearing, and that they had changed the plan of the subdivision to incorporate a road through w s �v U0 n � w —wi h u7 w w0 Q J U =w Z r 1-. O Z }- w= �p a0 m H _ Z ui rl U= OF Z 0 to to Olympic View Drive. Mr. Maki agreed that the current proposal before the Council would be agreeable to them, and stated that the advantage to the City would be to get a finished street. Councilmember Van Hollebeke inquired if Mr. Maki had any conversations with the owner of Lot 11. Mr. Maki informed the Council that Mr. and Mrs. Earl Smith, owners of Lot' 11, have a buy -sell agreement with Dr. Park, would like to sell to Dr. Park, and are aware of what is happening. Scott Snyder, City Attorney, asked Mr. Maki if during his presentation he had stated that the applicant agrees that the amendment of the Street Map with a vacation ordinance would be contingent on developing the dedication of the yet unnamed street and the dedication of a native growth area. Mr. Maki stated this was correct. Mayor Fahey opened the audience comment portion of the hearing. Edward B. Swanson, 8111 182nd St. S.W., Edmonds, stated that he would like to see a road through to Olympic View Drive. Jim Thompson, 18305 80th Ave. W., Edmonds, stated that he owns lot 13, adjacent to the City's property, and the his main concern is getting a way through to Olympic View Drive. He explained that he is concerned about vacating the right-of-way without some assurances that there would be passage from 80th Ave. to Perrinville. Mr. Thompson stated that Mr. Maki's suggestion of a street through on 184th would be ideal. Sally Baringer, Heatherglen Lot 12, stated she is very much effected by this and that during the past 10 or 12 years she has received numerous notifications of different proposed actions. Ms. Baringer referred to the topography of Mr. Smith's property and stated she felt if a road was put in, that this would cause problems with her 30 foot bank. She explained that if the City does develop the road she would request that the bank be rocked. Mayor Fahey inquired if anyone else cared to make comments; hearing none, the Mayor closed the audience portion of the hearing. Councilmember Petruzzi stated that what the staff was proposing made sense to him and that the easement would give the City the control it needed, and in turn, give the Parks what they needed to be able to develop their property. Councilmember Petruzzi questioned staff about the various areas involved. COUNCILMEMBER PETRUZZI MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER VAN HOLLEBEKE, ON ITEM NO. 5, FOR THE RECOMMENDED ACTION TO ADOPT THE HEARING EXAMINER'S RECOMMENDATION AND APPROVE THE APPLICATION FOR A STREET MAP AMENDMENT WITH THE CONDITIONS RECOMMENDED BY THE HEARING EXAMINER. IN ADDITION, THE APPLICANT SHALL BE REQUIRED, AS PART OF ANY DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION, TO PROVIDE A 40-FOOT WIDE CONNECTION BETWEEN OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE AND HIS PORTION OF 184TH STREET SOUTHWEST (File No. ST- 96-78). MOTION CARRIED. COUNCILMEMBER MYERS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER HAAKENSON, THAT THE COUNCIL ACKNOWLEDGE THE CITY'S INTENT TO VACATE THE UNUSED RIGHT-OF-WAY ALONG OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE AND THE UNOPENED PORTION OF 184TH STREET SOUTHWEST FROM OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE EAST 253-FEET (File No. ST-96- 77, Hearing Examiner's Decision), SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes September3, 1996 Page 11 6iw LUH (1) o D)d =w l— 2 Z I-- H0 W LU 0- o�- LU =U �C _z LU Cr. U� O� Z t0 1) REQUIRE THE APPLICANT TO PROVIDE THE CITY WITH A 20-FOOT WIDE NATIVE GROWTH PROTECTION EASEMENT ALONG THE APPLICANT'S ENTIRE FRONTAGE ON OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE. 2) THE APPLICANT SHALL PROVIDE A LEGAL DESCRIPTION TO THE CITY WITHIN 21 CALENDAR DAYS. 3) AFTER RECEIVING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION, THE CITY COUNCIL SHALL PLACE, ON THE NEXT AVAILABLE CONSENT AGENDA, THE RESOLUTION ADOPTING THIS VACATION. 4) THE APPLICANT SHALL PAY TO THE CITY A SUM AGREED UPON BY THE STAFF AND THE APPLICANT FOR THE VACATED PROPERTY. Scott Snyder, City Attorney, referring to condition #4, brought to Council's attention that state law limits the amount of payback to one half when a person has previously dedicated property to the City. MOTION CARRIED. Design 7. AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN STANDARD FORM OF AGREEMENT WITH Services- MERRIT + PARDINI AND APPROVAL OF FUNDING FOR DESIGN ERVIC ON P UBLIC Public Safety - Facility SAFETY COMPLEX TidCTT.TTV Paul Mar, Community Services Director, reviewed Council's previous actions in advertising, selecting ` and negotiating a contract with Merrit & Pardini. Mr. Mar reviewed the packet contents and asked for t questions from Council. Councilmember Nordquist asked about Exhibit D. Mr. Mar explained, that this is Merritt + Pardini's overhead statement for audit purposes and has nothing to do with the City's contract. COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MYERS, TO APPROVE ITEM 7 AND AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO SIGN STANDARD FORM OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN OWNER AND ARCHITECT WITH MERRITT & PARDINI FOR DESIGN SERVICES ON PUBLIC SAFETY COMPLEX FACILITIES IN THE AMOUNT OF $830,830. MOTION CARRIED. Council President Earling stated that there was a question of the funding source to pay a settlement that had been allocated to Mr. Pearson. City Attorney Snyder reviewed the actions that had brought this legal matter before Council and indicated that a settlement had been entered into, with the Council's approval, and now the money needs to be moved from the Council Contingency Fund so it can be paid. Ag settlement rnen AgrcanrnCOUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER VAN t (Peamon) HOLLEBEKE, TO AUTHORIZE THE STAFF TO SPEND $5,000 FROM THE COUNCIL Funding CONTINGENCY FUND TO SATISFY THE OBLIGATION PUT FORTH IN ITEM 8. MOTION CARRIED. u. ;. • _t. Mayor Fahey informed the Council that she would be flying to Washington D.C. to testify in front of the House Judiciary Committee regarding proposed amendments to the Fair Housing Act. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes September 3, 1996 Page 12 0 &EN im — P.L.L.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW $earth Offits. 2100 WeAlaka Ceator Tower, 1601 Fifth Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101.1686 (206) 447-7000 FAX: (206) 447-0215 L) ' EACSIM LE TRANSMITTAL, SU EET Gate o: Transmitted W = F-; 09/19/96 En ti- 1" O! Attention Fax Number Taal Pages (W/Cove r LL a Page) D ''. Sandra S. Chart:, City Cleric 771.02 4 z 3: Jeff Wilson, Planning 771-0221 �_ o City of Edmonds z Ui ' [ ] Not Forwarded a o 01 Sander Fox Number Phone Number _ # Scott Snyder/gjx (206) 447-0215 (206) 447 7000 L 0::: Ow Accounting No.: OW6,150.071 Old File No.- z LU _' RE: Findings of mart and Conclusions z NOTES: CONYIDENTIALM NOTE The documant(s) a000mpanyio g this facsimile 0ansmir,sion oontaiue information fmtn the IAW Firm of Ogden Murphy Wallaoo _. which is confid"AW of privileged. The information is intendad to be for the use of the tndWtdual or cndty artnod on thin �- UwwTLittar aheet. if you am act the intaded recipient, be aware that any disctos0re, copying, distribution ear woo of the contmio of this tranaznitted idw=tion is v0bibit4l. if you have received this facsimile in error, plaaea notify us by tolephoaa inumdiatoly ao that we oats arrauga for the retrieval of the original clocuments at W cost t0 you. 01 t® operator: 04 w3w.jxv",9BV Reow 0919% 00/10!06 THU 13:07 FAX 200 447 0216 OCt)EN MURPHY WALLACE 9 002 { Fi1gMGS OF FACT Ari_�rf1Nf'i iT4iC11"iS Olt LAW BMRE THE EDMONDS CrrY COUNCIL z li z 'LU Consolidated Hearing Application of Charles Maid to vacate unused right -Of -way lying west of JOlympic View Drina north of 184th Street, to amend the official street map to remove plan lined L) 0 rights -of --way of 184th Street S.W. 253 feet of right-of-way of 184th Street S.W., to vacate Cn w public right-of-way 'between Olympic View Drive and 76th Avenue W. and an approximately � � 10 to 20-foot wide portion of the public right-of-way on the west side of Olympic View Drive U.1 north of 184th Street, LU File No.: ST 96-77, ST-96-78 LL L O Y z F This matter came on for a consolidated hearing before the Edmonds City Council on o z September 3, 1996. Applications to amend the City's official street map to .remove 60-foot' LUUJ right-of-way between Olympic View Drive and 80th Avenue W. commencing just north of 184th o Street S.W., to vacate an unopened portion of a 20-1oot-wide public right-of-way line between Olympic View Drive and approximately 176th Avenue W. and to vacate approximately 10 to o W(; 20-foot wide portion Of the public right-of-way located on the west side of Olympic View Drina running north approximately 184th Street S.W. for approximately 270 feet, were combined with an application to amend tho City's official street map to remove plan lined 60-foot-wide right-�of- _ z way between Olympic View Drive and 80th Avenue W, starting just north of 184th Street S.W., (n ~ reduce the plan lined right-of-way for 184th Street S.W. commencing at Olympic View Drive westerly for approximately 253 feet, and to remove a plan lined right-of-way lying west of F-} z Olympic View Drive and north of 184th Street S.W. All the proposed requests are located adjacent to or across the following property addresses: 7704 Olympic View Drive, 18325 either 80th Avenue W., and 18408 79th Pl. W. This decision is based upon the record before the Edmonds City Council and the record and recommendation of the City's Hearing Examiner. The recommendations of the Hearing 3 Examiner dated July 26, 1996, are adopted as the Council's findings and conclusions except as specifically amended herein. ADDITIONAL. TESTLMONY riND INFORMA'PION 0 At the City Council hearing, the staff recommendation was amended and differed from that presented to the Hearing Examiner. The Bearing Examiner in his findings at page 10, recommendation 4, recommends denial of the request to remove from the official street trap of the plan lined right-of-way adjacent to Olympic 'mew Drive. Staff recommended to the City Council that, in conjunction with the platting process, the City's interest of providing slope stability could be achieved through the creation of a native growth protection casement for slope t €3 -1- A+ i 1 i 1 08/18/98 THU 13:08 FAX 200 44T 0218 OGDEN MURPHY WALLACE (�j04S ' r3 `a n stability rather than a full taking of the property as right-of-way. The purpose for the additional right-of-way was to control vegetation on the slope to enhance stability and that same objective a can be achieved through the less intrusive means of a native growth protection easement. z �! :C W In the course of the hearings, the applicant acknowledged his willingness to await final approval of the vacations and street map amendment until such time as development approval L v for the property located at 7704 Olympic View Drive, 18325 80th Avenue W. and 18409 79th a Pl. W. is finally granted. The exact location of interior strects, connections and other required Cnw. = mitigations cannot be finally ascertained until such approvals are complete. -J En O1 (Sl�iCI t)biS LU The Edmonds City Council therefore concludes that the purposes and objectives of the w f. Edmonds Community Development Code will be met by: cn �, _ ;' 1. Amendment of the Official Street Map to delete the plan line for 60 feet of right- z of -way between Olympic View Drive and 80th Avenue W. in accordance with Z Exhibit A, Attachment 5, to the Hearing Examiner's recommendation. ww o; 2. Amendment of the Official Street Map to delete the plan lined extension of 184th o �'—'', street S.W. lying east of the proposed plat road, retaining any existing utility 4 easement and to maintain future provisions for utilities. See Exhibit A, UJ i v Attachment 5, to the Hearing Examiner's recommendation. W Q. _ z. 3. Deny amendment of the official street map to delete the plan lined extension of 184th St. S.W. lying west of the proposed plat road. In conjunction with the o subdivision and development approval for the subject property, that section of z right-of-way may be required to be widened and relocated to accommodate a future 184th St. S.W. street extension between the unopened right-of-way south of lot 11 and the future plat road. 4. Approval of the amendment of the official street map to remove 20 feet of right- of-way adjacent to Olympic View Drive contingent upon: a. Approval of a 20-foot-wide native growth protection easement along the ` applicant's frontage along Olympic Viow ]give, the extent and nature of t which will be determined as a part of the platting approval process. Ci b. The provision to the City within 21 calendar days to the date of approval of a legal dcwription for the native growth protection easement. c. The payment of compensation for the vacated property in accordance with the submitted appraisal adjusted in accordance with provisions of state law and City ordinance. t0 -2. S. The future application to develop the property owned by the applicant is and shall be subject to all applicable requirements contained in the Edmonds Community Development Code. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to ensure Compliance with the various provisions contained in those ordinances. nothing herein shall be interpreted to prejudge or limit the discretion of the City Council in reviewing such application(s) to finally determine the placement and appropriate route of interior roads and utilities and to mitigate the impacts, if any, from the development. w =V In order to provide for a orderly process, the City Council directs that the City Attorney J F-; I LL prepare ordinances for vacation and ordinances amending the official street map. These LU 01, ordinances shall be held and presented to the City Council only in conjunction with an approved development plan providing for adequate alternative connections for roads, pedestrian and bike LL ¢ ways, and utilities in the arse. Part of the City Council's required Findings and Fearing cn a ' Examiner's Recommendations regarding the proposed vacations and amendments to the Official _ LU i; Street Map are a finding that the actions are in accordance with the policies of the z F Comprehensive Flan and the provisions of the Community Development Code. This finding is o based in part upon the assumption that future access will be provided during development of the w w: property. Therefore, it is inappropriate to finally adopt ordinances of vacation or amending the n! Master Street Map until such time as a platting or other development process makes provision U cn , for access. W DONE this day of , 1996. � F Fi. U. z di Nt X Mayor Barbara S. Fahey a z Attest! Sandra S. Chase, City Clerk wauawatGO KIEWi IE .3_ ­w7 EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL Agenda Memo Originator: Planning Division For Action: X Subject: HEARING ON A REQUEST TO VACATE THE UNOPENED PORTION OF THE 20-FOOT WIDE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY LYING BETWEEN OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE AND APPROXIMATELY 76TH AVENUE WEST; AND, A REQUEST TO VACATE AN APPROXIMATELY 10 - 20-FOOT WIDE PORTION OF THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE RUNNING NORTH OF APPROXIMATELY 184TH STREET SOUTHWEST APPROXIMATELY 270 FEET., THE PROPOSED RIGHTS -OF -WAY VACATIONS ARE LOCATED ADJACENT TO THE . I PROPERTY AT 7704 OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE. (Applicant: Charles Maki I File No. ST-96-78) Clearances: Departmentlinitials Agenda Time: 30 Minutes Admin Svcs/Finance Community S Cs City Attorney Engineering Agenda Date: September 3, 1996 City Clerk Parks & Red Court Plannin t. Exhibits Attached: Personnel Public Works 1. Vicinity Map Fire Treatment Plant 2. Appraisal Report (dated 5/6/96) Police City Council Mayor 3. Letter and map from Mr. Maki Reviewed by Council -Finance' Committee: Community services Public Safety Approved for Consent Agenda: Recommend Review by Full Council: Expenditure Amount Appropriation Required: $0 Budgeted: $0 Required: $0 Funding Source: Not Applicable Previous Council Action: None Narrative: 0 The applicant is seeking to vacate the existing 20-foot wide right-of-way lying between Olympic View Drive and approximately 76th Avenue West. Additionally, the applicant is seeking to vacate a 1010 26- foot wide portion of the right-of-way along Olympic View Drive (see Exhibits I and 3. Attachment A). t { There are three principal issues concerning this application: 1) The preservation (or loss) of a possible connection between Olympic View Drive and 80th Avenue West; 2) Slope stability and preservation along Olympic View Drive; and 3) Long term impacts associated with this vacation. 11 The applicant states that the possible connection between Olympic View Drive and 80th Avenue West Q !� will be preserved in that the applicant will eventually apply for a Planned Residential Development with w, it's associated road that combined with the remaining connection to 184th Street Southwest on the g: applicants property, will insure that the applicant will still make provision for a connection. -J o! The applicant has stated that he is willing to grant the City a easement for slope stability along his entire cn w frontage along Olympic View Drive. This will provide the City with greater control over slopes along rn LU _ Olympic View Drive than presently exists. -J F. En w U. } The long term impact from this decision essentially concerns the ability to make a connection between 80th Avenue West and Olympic View Drive at some point in time in the future. The applicant is correct ¢ _, in his analysis that an subdivision of his roe will require a street and the City has the authority to Y Y property rtY q ty ty , um- _ ; require the development of his portion of 184th Street Southwest. Should engineering studies suggest a N a different alignment a further alteration of the Official Street Map could take place in conjunction with a UJI proposed subdivision. Z F z OF; The appraiser has assigned a value of $15,000 to the property to be vacated. Review of the appraisers w w report suggests that his determination is consistent with accepted appraisal methods and his determination is reliable (see Exhibit 2). v Nj a ti Recommended Action: w w�, Acknowledge the City's intent to vacate the unused right-of-way along Olympic View Drive and the unopened portion of 184th Street Southwest from Olympic View Drive east 253-feet (File No. ST-96-77, Z' Cn! Hearing Examiners Decision), subject to the following conditions: U 1) Require that the applicant provide the City with a 20-foot wide native growth protection easement z along the applicant's entire frontage along Olympic View Drive. 2) The applicant shall provide a legal description to the City within 21 calendar days. 3) After receiving the legal description, the City Council shall place on the next available consent agenda the resolution adopting this vacation. ' 4) The applicant shall pay to the City the sum of $15,000 for the vacated property. Council Action: Exhibit 1 I LAND APPRAISAL REPORT c96-098 — PARK, BAN C.—* Tniat 505. 00 LUPPAwt­1 T5 455 1 ft-"v A--- VO RECMDM ADDRESS Cl EEVIONDS cm* , MHOMSH am* WA ZIP cod* 98020 LwdDewbfon SEE Ssf, petai S N/A D*b- -1 S­ NIA loan N/A Vm P,."rrjFdffh*;;;tf*d FeeUutfwww L3D*&*,,,aipuo Aaww new rwwwr_. 8 N/A tw.) fain dwoo w bo pstd by MW 2N/A cvwwb&aonaawb a NCT APJM�Z litw'dwimom M*U, CMTUM A&Im. Oaamm - NONE APPVW k"rmb. b Amp w- APPRAISE FOR RIGHP OF I'MY MMCHAqF By CHAMRS MW np W141IT-M L-0a,, F-I fto M Suburban F-1 ftw &A up Eg ow "% 0 014,1075% 0 U-d-1 Uy- G1.w1h If.% 0"— 0 S.,m co :* 0 Sta. PMWVVA.. [10 kwa.0v (D WA. 0 mdr&v WWSUP* E3 w-tmp w, agL— Q Ow SUP* M."*v r— 4.0 M.. Q Ow a M- ­11" Up 75 1 F—py __I % 24 r..oy — 5 % Apft 5% cwft 7 % C­w % V..m 3% PARKS AND OW" h F"WA tend U" ER--, ­y _7D uuy Twft pi— Pia.n To P., OOWP--Y 0,­ [3 T~A <5 % v..m eft). F-py PeA. R.." s 150,000 itts �600000 ft-cbmkvmv9kvS 260 000 WrQW rw* Age Rwp 0 ym fa go YwL Fdak" Aq. zu Y. Cd to W%kAry thou todlom fsrohblf w u0vwr.bls, fftc6v moUWAII, (..g. P.1,11. P.M. ict-It rWw. W-Y &WV--4 SWW C...,A— " errpwflawt C.1.1bv, I, Shpft c­w" b S&MU Ad.WKY.1 1`05. TW-9-UW- P---W'w f'umft' Adwy.l UMW Property Campagbitt, prawcaa. ft. 0.0-ft C-M. Poke & FW Pm*edon G­0 A"- of Pmpodl­ PW-W M M-6-1 Good 0 r_1 m F-1 Dd Ag 10 136 12 cy 0 m Fat 0 0 El M F-1 F-1 F-1 F 1 Poor 0 c:1 m M F-1 ED F-1 SEE ADDEND Ot,­O-w SEE ADDENIXM 9,40 ScI. FL a Am$ Co nr tat 12000) p.-41.p—Mnft (Ed. 0d.-IrA0-I0.AVMQ.49— IOr SEE ADDENDUM Publa COW (D,KdW) OFF SITE IMPROVEMEN173 Togo VARIABLE SLOPE / SEE ADDENDLE Matta (35 60"1 Aaaem Mmm Flfd-t- atat TOTAL SF,1S WICAL FOR AM a" ASPHALT ShW / NMI TYPICAL/SEE W.I. mothw­. MAO ­4 vww NO VIM f s-s~ a at- ef­,r UE 0.br�h- ' Omi-go APPEARS WE2MV_ UZ— O.L & T.L 0;E bit W"fty TO.Wd h 0 HUD kWnMUd Spo" I'lad HaWd A�7 [M No Lj Y" Mcaund Sidwft M)C Swt LjghW p­bW aq wft­bI. IAt&;; u7.pp—.t W"M­-b. —W---t- af 01W ad. SEE AMENIM M* ur&MWd hu malted rmoit rmM w4v at vqwrt*e mxt mimW vd MAU* Ja ft VA36d Wd hU oDr4kkmd Um bar MUMI U&V" 7b* d.-Ipdm Irbdn If d.Ut vdp*MpI, MfiW&V Mftj Ma5W 10 ftM MM of ogd5=4 Vwtsftn bet- ta Wbj0d and Oorr"MW PMp4rlkL If 6 %VJRWA RM h f* a P-Mbl* P"My If Wp*dW b, W mat ftwonLbW WWp 11r mW mp" . mirm I.) s4amlg Is m6de, ft$ fft%KbV to kWI=Wd vale of ftbjtc4 If * OgnKMA PAM h Im =PmbW Is Weft la, or im Ww" 1-% V* sub).ct P"q, If plus (4) •*.*but h ..&, tw k—o*v ft kk.14d '0. of #* *& ITEPA I tl COMPARABLE NO. I COMPARABLE NO. 2 COMPARABLE NO. 3 Mdnp NO RECCRDED M! ADDRESS. I'm 181ST PL SW , m I'M 11EADMALE B Emoms, . WA — 57XX 166TH PL SW �, WA PMA.Ry S, Sub(w 011011KI&WOM 1 4 MILE EAST 10 BLOCKS WEST I MILE EAST a.*. pd. i N a 41 ' 000 & 65.000 s 68 000 Pa.. s N/A i 3.36 SF s 3.24/SF s5.38/SF Dab scum. INSPBCITON MSS TM TWINLS Tw/MTS Dsw of SW wd DESCRIPTION DESCRIPTION +(-)&A*.% DESCRIPTION + I.) A AdW DESCRIPTION S A*A TM. Ad)U81c­A N/A 7_ 1 695 12/21/95 6 L.e.%. SUBURB /AVG SUBURB VG SUBURB VG —SUBURB — AX AVG SUN4. 9400 SF 12190INO VW -4,500 20378 SF -8,800 12632 i -4 300 TOPOGRAPHY VARIABLE SLOPE --5,000 VARIABLE FLAT :-20,000 LcT Nar BmBL BunDAHLE :-go,000 Bunimm -32,460 BUIMABLE :-25,463 ConweNau N/A N/A ALL CASH 950630-0492 AM CASH ALL CASH 960116-0091: W A4 Cr.M Pba Mhur s 29.500 -1 pws Mors i 41 260 Pbe M mr s 9,763 11,500 s 23,740 M9 37 Corr Intj on M.MI D.I.: SEE ATTACHED ADDENDUM Comms141 *M ComM. of Appgafl: Fha F1.00laoftm The firfal value is estimated at the lawer rarge of the adjusted ves.MA% is based on subiect site be' rasmaller in total s'te area than the mmn= lot size. Mie subject is considered be7corttr value for Wlacent lots QUM I E:: V DEFREM, VJBJWr PROPEM AS OF _My5th .—to,% lobe$ is 000 A01 AppWw Of sppk") R, S Michael rT. Mlabort, MI FMWV colurtbia, Valuation Group, Inc. (206) 364-8580 Exhibit 2 w ADDENDUM TO NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS } The subject property is located within the City of Edmonds. The neighborhood boundaries z are considered to be 76th Avenue West to the east, Puget Sound to the West, Edmonds Drive Z' Way to the South and Meadowdale Beach to the north. This neighborhood is ~ w comprised primarily of single family dwellings reflecting average to good condition and wquality. Many of the residences to the west have views of the Puget Sound and the U o Olympic Mountains to the west. Access to employment, shopping and schools make this (n w neighborhood competitive in the market place. Mixed land use in the neighborhood is well - F balanced and typical for this suburban area with no negative impact on appeal. The wo ( overall marketing appeal for the subject market area is considered to be good. Q LL a` ADDENDUM TO SITE COMMENTS AND HIGHEST AND BEST USE zZ X The subject site is currently recorded as an unimproved public right-of-way extension of 0 184th Street SW. The site is an angled rectangle with dimensions of approximately 10 feet by 70 feet along Olympic View Drive and widens to 20 feet for a distance of 175.17 feet w w o south along Olympic View Drive. At this point the property angles 90 degrees sharp to the U un: a;: west for approximately 263.13 feet and is approximately 20 feet wide for this distance. o The estimated total site area is approximately 9,400 square feet. The property is a unimproved with heavy vegetative ground cover, and various tree species. The site slope is LL_ o : moderately steep along Olympic View Drive and then becomes a steep slope to the west up z an embankment. The site terraces in two places in the westerly direction with two sections s i with moderately steep slope. The site elevation peaks at mid -point traveling west and begins to slope downward to the west end of the site boundary. The initial elevation gain z from the eastern boundary is approximately 40 feet west to the first plateau, and then the site is flat for approximately 70 feet. At this point the site slopes approximately 20 feet downward to the western boundary. The Highest and Best Use of the subject site is, restz!#. ,:due to the configuration and topography. This narrow right-of-way configuration limits the site'use. The steep ' topography would appear to hinder the development of a right-of-way for public use. It appears that the highest and best use would've as additional site area for. adjacent 0 residential zoned property. This site does not appear to have any residential development capacity due to the narrow configuration. COMMENTS ON MARKET DATA AND COMPARABLE SALES All comparable sales are superior legal building lots, but they are comparable in location to the subject. Adjustments are made to reflect the differences in site utility and development t 49 potential. Adjustment are as follows: 1. Each sale is adjusted downward for superior functional and development i utility. c `j 2. Each sale is adjusted downward for the difference in site area to reflect the difference in site utility for larger lots. Sale No.1 has percolation and slope problems. This site was purchased as a single family z !i s development lot and is comparable in location to the subject. Sale No. 2 has steep slope w- and a level building area. Sale No. 3 is a level fully developed building lot and is superior z in location, and topography to the subject property. This property is situated within a odeveloped subdivision. U 0 V) w The subject lot is not considered to have development potential as a single parcel. The market valtie is based on the potential added value this parcel may have to adjacent o! LU parcels. Several sales of dysfunctional lots were researched, but only two sales are relevant :E i to the subject. One is a level lot with utilities that had an 18 foot fence encroachment that Lt Q rendered the lot unbuildable, and created a limited market for the property. The lot was a; sold by a local lender to a speculative investor for $20,000. The buyer indicated that the zF lot is at risk and will require extensive legal work and costs. The other sale was a parcel of. o land that sold for $10,000, but the buyer and seller would not disclose details of the z ww transaction, making a direct comparison to the subject very difficult. ADDENDUM TO ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS OBSERVED o _ o , i Unless otherwise stated in this report, the existence of hazardous substances, including without limitation asbestos, radon, polychlorinated biphenyl's, petroleum leakage, -or u z agriculture chemicals, which may or may not be present on the property, or other UJ Cn` environmental conditions, were not called to the attention of nor did the appraisers become J X aware of such during our inspection. The appraisers, however, are not qualified to detect z z such substances or conditions. If the presence of such substances, such as asbestos urea formaldehyde, foam insulation, or other hazardous substances or environmental conditions, may affect the value of the property, the value estimate is based on the assumption that there is no such condition on or in the property or in such proximity thereto that it would cause a loss of value. No responsibility is assumed for any such conditions, or for any expertise or engineering knowledge required to discover them. The client is urged to retain an expert in the field of environmental impacts upon real estate if } so desired. 0,11 CONDITIONS OF APPRAISAL COMMENTS This appraisal has been prepared with the property in "as is" condition. The appraisers assume the buyer is aware that this appraisal on the subject property does not serve as a warranty on the condition of the property, and is also aware that it is his responsibility to examine the property carefully and to take all necessary precautions before signing a m contract, and that he is also aware that the estimate for repairs (if any) is a non -warranted opinion of the appraisers unless otherwise stated. Moreover, unless stated, this appraisal presumes that all improvements (if any) to the subject property have been made in conformance with the appropriate building codes, and that the appropriate permits have been received as required by county or city ordinance. If an on -site well supplies the domestic, potable water, this appraisal presumes - unless stated - that it conforms to the required standards for well capacity, and quality according to the appropriate governmental agencies. This report has been. prepared in accordance with the standards and reporting requirements of the Office of Thrift Supervision. The purpose of this appraisal is to estimate Market Value as defined by the- Office of Thrift Supervision Memo CFR12 563 & 571. APPRAISAL FUNCTION The function of this appraisal is to provide sufficient and supportable data for purposes of purchasing the subject property from the City of Edmonds. OBJECTIVE (PURPOSE) OF THE APPRAISAL The objective of this appraisal is to estimate the market -value, as defined herein, of the fee simple title to the subject property. SCOPE OF THE APPRAISAL Inspection and research concerning the subject property; research Multiple Listing Services, Commercial Property Information Services, county records fc(r information on comparable' land sales; confirmation of sales data; and finishing a written appraisal with the assistance of a computer and appraisal software, and delivery of the completed appraisal. SELF CONTAINMENT This appraisal report is intended to be a self contained document, containing all information necessary to enable the reader to understand the appraisers' opinions. Any third party studies referred to, such as pest, hazardous materials, or structural reports have been verified by the appraisers to the extent the, assumptions and* con usions are used. TREND ANALYSIS An analysis of marketing times and trends, although considered, are not discussed in the appraisal report. C' p DEFINITION OF WRKET VALUE: The most probable price which a property should bring to a comped0ve and open market under all conditions requisite to a fair sale, the buyer and solar, each soling pnudently, knowledgeably and assuming %a price is not affected by undue atimukm Implicit in this definition Is the cansummatkm of a sate as of a specified date and the passing of title from senor to buyer under conditions whereby: (1) buyer and senor are typically motl atod; (2) both parties are well informed or wall advised, and each acting in what he considers his own best interest; (3) a reasonable time to allowed for exposure In the open market; (4) payment Is made In terms of cash In U.S. dollars or rn terms of financial ! arrangements comparable thereto; and (5) the price represents the normal consideration for the property sold unaffected by special or creative financing or sales concessions' granted by anyone associated with the sale. Z (( Q ' Adjustments to the comparable& must be made for special or creative financing or sates concessions. No adjustments are nxasavy for those which by the as a result tradition tow in S y-4 coats are normally paid sellers of or a' market area; these casts are readily identifiable since the saner pays these coats In "ally an sates tramactbns. Special or croanve financag adjustments r tJJ can be made to the comparable property by comparisons to financing terms offered by a third party Imntutional tender that is not already Involved In the property or transaction. Any adjustment should not be calculated on a mechanical dollar for Q O dolor cost of the financing or concession but the dollar amount of any adjustment should approximate the markers reaction LUU 0 to the financing or comossione based on the appralsees judgement (, �a LU (n ul H CERTIFICATION AND STATEMENT OF LIMITING CONDITIONS (n LL i O` CERTIFICATION: The Appraiser coniles and agrees that LU 1. The Appraiser has no present or contemplated future Interest in the property appraised; and neither the employment to make the appralal, nor the compensation for it, is contingent upon the appraised value of the property. ` a! 2. The Appraiser has no personal interest in or bias with respect to the subject matter of the appraisal report or the parod- pants to the sets. The 'Estimate of Market Valuo' in the appraisal report is not based in In LL Q O $' whole or part upon the race, color, or national origin of the prospaetive owners or occupants of the property appraised, or upon the race, color or national origin (n a t' of the present owners or occupants of the properties in the vicinity of the property appraised. 3. The Appraiser has personally impacted the property, both inside and out, and has made an exterior inspection of all S LU F" comparable sales fisted In the report. To the beat of the Appraisers knowledge and baler, all statements and Information to this report true Appraiser has Z )-- are and coroct, and the not knowingly withheld and significant information. 4. Al contingent and lmtling conditions are contained harsta Proposed by the terms of the assignment or by the under- 1— 0 signed affecting the analysts, opintom, and conclusions contained in the report). This S. appraisal report has been made In conformity with and Is subject to the requirements of the Code of Professional W Ethics and Standards of Professional Conduct of the appraisal organizations with which the Appraiser Is affiliated. = O 8. Alt conclusions and opinions concembv the real ealate that are set forth In the appraisal report,wera prepared by the 'Revlew Appraiser whose signature appears on the appraisal report, unless Indicated as Appraiser.' NO change of any item In ci (n the appraisal report shag be made by anyone other then the Appraiser, and the Appraiser shalt have no responsibility for any O such unauthorized change. 0 11J LU CONTINGENT AND LIMITING CONDITIONS: The certification of the Appraiser appearing In the appraisal report is subject Z U(i to the following conditions and to such other specific and trolling conditions be are set forth by the Appraiser in the report (— 1. The Appraiser assumes no responoWty for matters of a legal nature affecting the property appraised or the Otie there- 0 O to, nor does the Appraiser render any opinion as to the One, which to assumed to be good and marketable. The property Is. — appraised as though under responsible ownership. LU (n! 2. Any sketch In the report may show approximate dimensions and is included to asaist the reader, visualizing the prop. any, The Appraiser has made no survey of the property, fJ = 3. The Appraiser is not required to Vivo testimony or appear In court because of having made the appraisal with tolerance f— F— to the properly In question, unless armrgemonto have been previously made therefor. O 4. Any distribution of the valuation in the report between land and Improvemorits applies only under the extanng program Z of utilization. The separate valuations for land and building must not be used In conjunction with any other appraisal and am Invalid It so used. S. The Appraiser assumes that there are no hidden or unapparent conditions of the pmperty, subaot, or structures, which would render It more or less valuable. The Appraiser assumes no responsibiity for such conditions, or for engineering which might be required to discover such factors. e. Information, estimates, and opinions furnished to the Appraiser, and contained in the report were obtained from sources considered reliable and believed to be true and correct However, no m3ponslbntry for accuracy of such Items furnished the Appraiser can be assumed by the Appraiser. T. Disclosure of the contents of the appraisal report Is govemed by the Bylaws and RegulaOans of the profeasbnai appraisal organizations with which the Appraiser is affiliated. { S. Neither all, nor any part of the content of the report, or copy thereof pncludirg conclusions as to the property value, the Identy of the Appraiser, prodessional designations, reference to any professional appraisal organizations, or the firm with .�-.- which the Appraiser is connected), shag be used for any purposes by,"ne but the client specified In the report, the borrower if appraisal toe paid by same, the mortgagee or its successors and assigns, mortgage Insurers, consultants, professional appraisal organizations, or any state or federally approved Snancial Insti ugon, any department, agency, or instrumentally of the United States or any state or the District of Columbia, without the previous written consent of the Appraiser, nor shall it be conveyed by anyone to the public through advertising, public relations, news, sales, or other media, without the written consent and approval of the Appraiser. P. On all appraisals, subject to satisfactory completion, repairs, or alterations, the appraisal report and value conckuatort are continuant upon completion of the Improvements in a workmanlike manner. ADDITIONAL CERTIFICATION: The appraiser further cenMes that: 1. This appraisal conforms to the Unirorm Standards or Professional Appraisal Practice ('USPAP") adopted by the Appraisal Standards Board of the Appraisal Foundation, except that the Departure Provision of the USPAP does not apply. 2. Their compensation is not contingent upon the reporting of a predetermined value or direction in value that favors the cause of the client, the amount of the value estimate, the attainment of a stipulated result, or the Occurence of a subsequent event 3. This appraisal assignment was not based on a requested minimum valuation, a specific valuation, or the approval of a ban. i Data:..§LMPA ................ A pry Rcut nbQr(s) ... ......... ��� ... ,�i�� Th attd t3]. J. ilTon, MAi .. • ... • .. • . • • • • ... ... fmddb Nofto sw Mars eta JVt. tie TOTAL' eppYAei ar a Y male. Yea t (a0D) aasaeu as to".aA. as ftm-"rjpWt PARK, BAN Eammrw Addran NO RBMRDED ADDRESS, SEE LBML DESCP PTION �I EUMNDS TSB to a WA n 98020 Lender MAID f SUBJB= east along Olyapic View Drive SUBJB= south from the north side of Olympic View Drive Legal Description HAN Z. PARK - PIRD LEGAL DESCRIPTION - PORTIONS OF 184TH STREET SW & VACATED OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE TO BE THAT PORTION OF OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE AND 184TH STREET SW ADJOINING LOTS AND 10 BLOCK I ADMIRALTY ACRES ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 12 OF PLATS PAGE 48 RECORDS OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY WASHI DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: NGTON, BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 9: THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT 9 ALONG A CURVE TO THE LEFT HAVING A RADIUS OF 613.70 FEET AN ARC DISTANCE OF 26.63 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE S 00 59'20* E ALONG SAID EAST LINE 50.00 FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT IN THE WEST LINE OF SAID OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE AND THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THIS DESCRIPTION; THENCE ALONG SAID WEST LINE S81000-40-WIO.00 FEET S8059'20-E 70.00 FEET, S 81000'40'W 10.00 FEET, S 8059'20- E 175.15 FEET To THE NORTH LINE OF 184TH STREET SW; THENCE N 89007- 51- W ALONG SAID NORTH LINE 242.66 FEET To THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 10- THENCE S 330 04' 19* E 24.11 FEET To THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID STREET- THENCE S 89067'51 - E ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE 252.98 FEET TO A POINT WHICH SEARSS' 8059'20'E FROM THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE N 80 59'20'W, PARALLEL WITH SAID OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE 269.06 FEET To THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. 0 I t �c Hof `ti+.•►/''`/ / sa, coNc` _/ 9 � ► of s-n 3SE 11 .+ z 05. DECK �� N h ► ` 1 Y*Z52.9 26I13` 3210 325 t, N5 .. f� i z til, Uj Ui ,O� LU; LU .1 to LL 0 LU m g m LL U, z Z Lli Lli 2 D, D LU LuLL � 0, L) i-- 0 z Eto Survey Map 0. .. ... .. � � f . � _ � � t'. .��' a ,..:. r) Comparable Sales o ® �4 �r I®' 32jo 25) 7s' O oaY;b i � MEAD WM E (7 1 6� DJV 2� t MRS EAGLES c� 0 NEST DIV l � / � � (7417) � O i I % ; ob of 4 l ol In I I _ mOB OAGE Comparable Sales, 0 P E/o5 NT N/L 28 28 s IT 3 � oba s3 sP �rss taa /„y 166th PL. S.W f 3 MAO WOE h s O la 167M PL 5�n 1 ___ _______-_------------- _ `S,t.--- ---- _---- _------------ �_----- r ; I �. W 02 oS, a r Itn ro Q1681h PL.—i _� I t a a 11 a Comparable Sales PRINCIPAL QUALIFICATIONS Michael J. McMahon, MAI EDUCATION Shoreline Community College —Specialized courses in real estate•subject matter North Seattle Community College —Specialized courses in real estate subject matter Condemnation Appraisal,1993, Highline Community College, Bill Webster, WDOT Instructor Easement Valuation,1993, SRWA 1 American Institute of Real Estate Appraisal — Real Estate Appraisal Principles American Institute of Real Estate Appraisal — Basic Valuation Procedures American Institute of Real Estate Appraisal — Capitalization Theory and Techniques, Part A American Institute of Real Estate Appraisal — Capitalization Theory and Techniques, Part B American Institute of Real Estate Appraisal — Case Studies in Real Estate Valuation American Institute of Real Estate Appraisal — Standards of Professional Practice American Institute of Real Estate Appraisal — Valuation Analysis and Report Writing American institute of Real Estate Appraisal — Also: Discounted Cash Flow Analysis; Investment Analysis; Applied Sales Comparison Approach; Appraising for Pension Funds; Subdivision Analysis; Rates, Ratios, and Reasonableness; Comprehensive Appraisal Workshop PROFESSIONAL DESIGNATION Member Appraisal Institute, MAI General Certified Appraiser, Washington State, *270-11 MC -MA HM JA58AK AFFILIATIONS American Institute for Economic Research Hoover Institute International Right of Way Association EXPERIENCE Columbia Valuation Group, Seattle, WA, Founding Principal. Seafirst Bank, Seattle, WA, Assistant Vice President and Senior Appraisal Officer —Real estate advisory and appraisal services. The Coulton Company, Seattle and Bellevue, WA, Managing Partner — Appraisal, feasibility study, and real estate advisory services. Coulton, Kelling & Wuestoff, Seattle, WA, Market Researcher/Appraiser — Appraisal and appraisal support services. KA J W' U 0' 01 tu+, -J U) LL o� W ca J LL T� z z t- H 0; W W': �a o1=U F- H _z WU) U= o~ z 2. Case No. ST 96-77 ST 96-78 3. Location: 7704 Olympic View Drive 4. Application: as outlined in the official agenda 5. Amended- application: Address the recommendations of the Hearing Examiner and the neighborhood concerns. 6. Major issues: a. Remove from the Official Street Map the proposed 60 foot right-of-way between Olympic View Drive and 80th Avenue West. (colored yellow on the attached map) b. Remove from the Official Street Map and vacate the unopened 184th Street Southwest 20 foot right-of-way lying east of the proposed plat road, provided that a utility easement is retained. ( colored light blue) c. a right-of-way be retained by.the City on the unopened extension of the 184th Street Southwest right-of-way-lyingwest of the m proposed plat road. When the property is platted, that section of the right-of- way shall be widened and relocated to accommodate a street extension to 80th Avenue West from the future plat road, currently on the south of Lot 11. ( colored red) Exhibit li 3 U O' o. Ui U. u � O 2� U._j S2 a# = w' I'-x; zP t- o' z w LUi S U' wO �z Lqrn or z I i d. Removal from the Official Street Map the and vacate the right-of-way adjacent to Olympic View Drive. The City would be granted an easement for bank erosion control for the same property plus a 20 foot strip adjacent to Olympic View Drive from the above strip south to the south boundary of the Property. (colored orange) e. Approval of the items be transferable, B. Reasons and Logic for Approval 1. The reason to approve (a.) is that it is being replaced with the proposed plat road (outlined in green), plus a connection to a proposed street on the west boundary that will meet the street standards now in force. 2. The reason to approve (b.) is that it is being replaced with the proposed plat road that will be far easier and less expensive to build, considering the topography of the property. The city will be giving a 20foot right-of-way and gaining a 30 foot or 40 foot complete& street. 3. The original application asked for a removal of the right-of-way described in (c.). However, to accommodate the ,concerns and the request of the neighbors, the applicant will accept the Hearing Examiners recommendations. 4. The engineering department of the City has agreed that the City r does not need the property (d.)and would only use it for bank erosion control. The property owner will grant an easement to the City for erosion control on tI he property described in the application and further will grant to the City an easement for erosion control for a 20 foot strip adjacent to Olympic View m Drive from the above strip south to the south boundary that borders Olympic View Drive. M d. Removal from the Official Street Map the and vacate the right-of-way adjacent to Olympic View Drive. The City would be granted an easement for bank erosion control for the same property plus a 20 foot strip adjacent to Olympic View Drive from the above strip south to the south boundary of the Property. (colored orange) e. Approval of the items be transferable, B. Reasons and Logic for Approval 1. The reason to approve (a.) is that it is being replaced with the proposed plat road (outlined in green), plus a connection to a proposed street on the west boundary that will meet the street standards now in force. 2. The reason to approve (b.) is that it is being replaced with the proposed plat road that will be far easier and less expensive to build, considering the topography of the property. The city will be giving a 20foot right-of-way and gaining a 30 foot or 40 foot complete& street. 3. The original application asked for a removal of the right-of-way described in (c.). However, to accommodate the ,concerns and the request of the neighbors, the applicant will accept the Hearing Examiners recommendations. 4. The engineering department of the City has agreed that the City r does not need the property (d.)and would only use it for bank erosion control. The property owner will grant an easement to the City for erosion control on tI he property described in the application and further will grant to the City an easement for erosion control for a 20 foot strip adjacent to Olympic View m Drive from the above strip south to the south boundary that borders Olympic View Drive. M V) W J H: US U. LU ` ti Q N d h = z_ I- F_ O' Z W w' n' �a C� tn' C2 F_ r� �- o -z Uiri) v_s o~ z 6. Lots 11,12, and 13 could be developed with a connecting street. D. 'Advantages to the neighborhood 1. The right-of-way between Olympic View Drive and 80th Avenue West would be preserved. 2. If Lot 11; Lot 12, and Lot 13 were to be developed, a street would be completed between Olympic View Drive and 80th Avenue West. E. Advantages to the owners of 7704 Olympic View Drive 1. A street can be constructed to best utilize the property with its severe topographical problems that replaces 184th Street.. p� 2. Restore the logical property lines along Olympic View Drive, 3. Provide for neighborhood agreement. --------------- i i t Si. 9. W OOD SCREEK—PLACE TRACT 999 :FiM1,r- ---------------- ADMIRALTY ACRES y BLOCK 2 — — — — ---`r---- / r 1` — — __ .. _ -7-.— \\, 1DIDEq GLEN •, t I 1 •� V "�1() \\\ roe 106 t��l ` �••:' s a e ---� -- r�r ----._ •/ �� ,• \` t` Rai �, e EDMONOR SEAL Y't°E RACTS 1 o a / .. •• K i ! \ y v 2`1 1 � t 2, \\ 23 I RoN TmOMAS REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL AND DEVELOPMENT CONSULTING (200 824.8923 v, August 19, 1996 U O, O rn �, City of Edmonds In „_ Planning Department O 250 5th Avenue North w 2 r Edmonds, WA 98020 LL D d ` h Attn: Jeff Wilson ='' RE: Columbia Valuation Group Ine. Appraisal Job No. 96-098 z I-- Right -of -Way parcel at 184th Strcct SW and Olympic View Drive, City of Edmonds f- O+ z �- w w: �p I am responding to your inquiry regarding the final value determination of the above referenced U va' property. The search for comparable land sales was conducted throughout the subject market o H area and revealed no sales of right-of-way sites or other property condemnations. The sales w Iu : selected were determined to be the best indicators of market value for the subject due to various r topographical constraints and location similarities of these sales. Adjustments were used to LL O indicate the site differences in size and building lot status. The subject value was based on the z! weighted averaging of the three adjusted sales and then rounded down to $15,000 to indicate LU V =': that the value was within the lower range of value for these sales. O~ z ff you have any questions regarding this matter, please me or Mike McMahon at 364.8580. Respectfully, } Ron Thomas Associate Appraiser tip W 0 , David Johnson Lars & Paulette Johnson Kathleen O'Bryan 7810 182nd P1 SW 8514 192nd St SW 182nd Edmonds, WA 98026 Edmonds, WA 98026 Ed7817monds, wA 980Pi 8w26 Wallace Danielson Jr. Susan Danielson Jr. 7822 182nd Pi sw Edmonds, WA 98026 Linda McCullough 18426 79th P1 w Edmonds, WA 98026 Richard & Tina O'Neill 18414 79th PI w Edmonds, WA. .98026 John lieuerman 18419 79th PI W Edmonds, WA 98026 Arne r nP - 1722 #201 SeattoA*98:LSS Earl Smith 18325 80th Ave W Edmonds, WA .98026 Han & Regina Park 7704 Olympic View Dr. Edmonds, WA-98026 Swanson 8111 182nd St. SW Edmonds, WA 98026 John & Muriel Quick 7914 182nd P1 SW Edmonds, WA 98026 Dana Gillet PO Box 7026- Lynnwood, WA 98046 Robert Joss 18415 79th PI Edmonds, WA 98026 William -&a- fb42"T!"9th Ppl w Edmonds, WA 98026 F ' A & Gloria Lafond 18227 80th Ave w Edmonds, WA 98026' U S P SERVICE 850 Ch ry Ave San B CA 94099 John Mellor 606 Sater Lane Edmonds, WA 98020 Dennis Parker 847 Dayton Edmonds, WA 98020 tk� Sit 0 Gary & Charlene Ramm 18418 79th Pi w Edmonds, WA 98026 Norman Barringer 18405 79th Pi W Edmonds, WA 98026 Glenn Roberts 18416 78th Ave W Edmonds, WA 98026 --Katherine- Morley 18203 80th Ave w Edmonds, WA 98026 James Thompson 18305 80th Ave Edmonds, WA 98026 Charles Maki 8235 Talbot Rd. Edmonds, WA 98026 J.L. Thompson 18305 80th Ave. W. Edmonds, WA 98026 Joe Scialdone 18332 80th Ave. W. Edmonds, WA 98026 f 13 s i Betty,Smith Diane Broughton/Edith Broughton Chris Hammond f� 18208 80th Ave. W. Edmonds, WA 98026 8006 181st ST. SW 8010 181st P1. SW Z Edmonds, WA 98026 Edmonds, WA 98026 z Z L F- w' • Bill Rankin 8005 181st P1 SW D'an Gossett/Lynda Hughes Resident o Edmonds, WA 98026 18105 80th Ave. W. Edmonds, WA 96026 8p06 180thPl. SW Edmonds,, WA 98026 vs w; LU o Terry Lee Walton 7922 180th St. SW Gretchen Copeland Resident LL <( Edmonds, WA 98026 7821 182nd Pl. SW Edmonds, WA 98026 8010`181st P1 SW Edmonds, WA 98026 z LU z ~ ~ a' Resident 18226 80th Ave. W. Resident 18203 80th Ave. W. Resident w w Edmonds, WA 98026 Edmonds, WA 98026 7917 182nd Pl. SW Edmonds, WA 98026 o: U cn' o r w w F;' Resident 7822 182nd Pi. SW Kathleen O'Bryan. Resident z Edmonds, WA 98026 7817 182nd-PI . SW Edmonds; WA 98026 8019 181st P1. SW Edmonds, WA 98026 ui cn` U S; O� z Resident 8018 181st Pl. SW Resident 8011 180th•P1. SW Resident Edmonds, WA 98026 Edmonds, WA 98026 8012 180th P1. SW Edmonds, WA 98026 r _...� Resident 18017 80th Ave. W: Resident. Resident t F Edmonds, WA 98026 8111 182nd,St. SW '` Edmonds, WA 98026 8110 182nd St. SW Edmonds, WA 98026 0 Gloria & Francis La Fond 18227 80th Ave, W. Resident Ronald &Yvonne Mattison tdmonds, WA 98026 18324 St9t Ave. W. Edmonds, WA 98026 8111 184th St. SW Edmonds, WA 98026 nrnnc uu cnn,,...... r_ ® Resident 18334 Andover St. Edmonds, WA 98026 }=: Resident 18335 81st Ave. W. Edmonds, WA 98026 `` p�"F�r �,�;'a ' ® .•1--. ,. Sty kiy'Y��;Htb 0 tQ -r. i RESOLUTION NO. R- 849 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS AND NOTICE OF HEARING FOR THE VACATION OF THE UNOPENED PORTION OF THE 20-FOOT WIDE PUBLIC RIGHT- OF-WAY LYING BETWEEN OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE AND APPROXIMATELY 76TH AVENUE WEST; AND, A REQUEST TO .VACATE AN APPROXIMATE 10 TO 20-FOOT WIDE PORTION OF THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE RUNNING NORTH OF APPROXIMATELY 184TH STREET SOUTHWEST APPROXIMATELY 270 FEET, (FILE NO. ST-96-78). WHEREAS, a petition has been filed with the City of Edmonds signed by an owner of interest in real property representing more than two-thirds of the property abutting upon the hereinafter described portions of the unopened portion of the 20-foot wide public right-of-way lying between Olympic View Drive and approximately 76th Avenue West; and, a request to vacate an approximate 10 to 20-foot wide portion of the public right-of-way located on the west side of Olympic View Drive running north of approximately 184th Street Southwest approximately 270 feet. WHEREAS, it appears that the public interest of the City of Edmonds, Washington; j would be served by holding a public hearing to consider the vacation of said portion of the unopened portion of the 20-foot wide public right-of-way lying between Olympic View Drive and approximately 76th Avenue West; and, a request to vacate an approximate 10 to 20-foot wide portion of the public right-of-way located on the west side of Olympic View Drive running north of approximately 184th Street Southwest approximately 270 feet. WHEREAS, the petition for vacation has been certified by the City Clerk. s NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Edmonds: r 1) That a public hearing be held to consider whether the public interest and general welfare of the City of Edmonds will be served by the vacation of the unopened portion of the 20- foot wide public right-of-way lying between Olympic View Drive ana approximately 76th Avenue West; and, a request to vacate an approximate 10 to 20-foot wide portion of the public right-of- way located on the west side of Olympic View Drive running north of approximately 184th Street Southwest approximately 270 feet, situate in Edmonds, Snohomish County, Washington, and described as follows: SEE EXHIBIT "A" 2) The City Clerk is hereby directed to provide notice in accordance with the ordinance requirements of such hearing to the parties, notifying them of the public hearing to be held before the Edmonds City Council in its chambers in the Plaza Room of the Edmonds Public Library on August 20, 1996, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be held. PASSED by majority vote of the Edmonds City Council in regular, open meeting on the 16th day of July , 19 96 . Page 1 of 2 96.18RLDOGI0.TUG96 RES•ORDIRES O r3 a 0 L; HAN Z. PARK - PRD LEGAL DESCRIPTION - PORTIONS OF 184TH STREET SW & OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE TO BE VACATED THAT PORTION OF OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE AND 184TH STREET SW ADJOINING LOT 9 AND 10 BLOCK I ADMIRALTY ACRES ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 12 -OF PLATS PAGE 48 RECORDS OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY WASHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 9; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT 9 •ALONG A CURVE TO. THE LEFT HAVING A RADIUS OF 613.70 FEET AN ARC DISTANCE OF 26.63 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE S 00 59'20"E ALONG SAID EAST LINE 50.00 FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT IN THE WEST LINE OF SAID OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE AND THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THIS DESCRIPTION; THENCE ALONG SAID W�ESTLINE S 81000'40"W 10.00 FEET, S,8059'20" F_ 70.00FEET, S 810 00'40* W 1-0.00 FEET, S 80 59' 20-E 175.15 FEET TO THE NORTH LINE OF 184TH STREET SW; THENCE N 89007'51"W ALONG SAID NORTH LINE 242.66 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 10; THENCE S 33"04'19" E 24.11 FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID STREET; THENCE S 890 07' 51 " E ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE 252.96 FEET TO A POINT WHICH BEARS S 80 59'20"E"FROM THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE N 80 59'20"W. PARALLEL WITH SAID OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE 269.06 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. k ° ,o w� yam, � �❑❑❑❑❑0❑❑❑❑❑❑ �, oN n oo� � o �`=I g4 R ❑ <®®®®®❑❑❑❑❑❑0fill sg 0 g molk g g g�g gg z~t w a z ❑0DODO g a 10 ❑ §$ a� " b� Aso n o a� Ysa3 `w' 41 11 Mill all 11 32XIO 25XIJ zz� ADDENDUM TO NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS The subject property is located within the City of Edmonds. The neighborhood boundaries z 1� are considered to be 76th Avenue West to the east, Puget Sound to the West, Edmonds s 1-'= Z. Way to the South and Meadowdale Beach Drive to the north. This neighborhood is _ comprised primarily of single family dwellings reflecting average to good condition and quality. Many of the residences to the west have views of the Puget Sound and the LU o Olympic Mountains to the west. Access to employment, shopping and schools make this Ln w neighborhood competitive in the market place. Mixed land use in the neighborhood is well � F balanced and typical for this suburban area with no negative impact on appeal. The Cn O! overall marketing appeal for the subject market area is considered to be good. UJ ti LL 4 1. ADDENDUM TO SITE COMMENTS AND HIGHEST AND BEST USE Ln a, F' The subject site is currently recorded as an unimproved public right-of-way extension of Z 184th Street SW. The site is an angled rectangle with dimensions of approximately 10 feet w w by 70 feet along Olympic View Drive and widens to 20 feet for a distance of 175.17 feet south along Olympic View Drive. At this point the property angles 90 degrees sharp to the yr west for approximately 263.13 feet and is approximately 20 feet wide for this distance. The estimated total site area is approximately 9,400 square feet. The property is Xv; unimproved with heavy vegetative ground cover, and various tree species. The site slope is ~o moderately steep along Olympic View Drive and then becomes a steep slope to the west up ,y z an embankment. The site terraces in two places in the westerly direction with two sections with moderately steep slope. The site elevation peaks at mid -point traveling west and z begins to slope downward to the west end of the site boundary. The initial elevation gait from the eastern boundary is approximately 40 feet west to the first plateau, and then the site is flat for approximately 70 feet. At this point the site slopes approximately 20 feet downward to the western boundary. The Highest and Best Use of the subject site is restricted due to the configuration and - topography. This narrow right-of-way configuration limits the site use. The steep topography would appear to hinder the development of a right-of-way for public use. It i appears that the highest and best use would be as additional site area for adjacent p residential zoned property. This site does not appear to have any residential development capacity due to the narrow configuration. 'l COMMENTS ON MARKET DATA AND COMPARABLE SALES All comparable sales are superior legal building lots, but they are comparable in location to i O the subject. Adjustments are made to reflect the differences in site utility and development potential. Adjustment are as follows: 1. Each sale is adjusted downward for superior functional and development utility. H 2. Each sale is adjusted downward for the difference in site area to reflect the difference in site utility for larger lots. Z Sale No. 1 has percolation and slope problems. This site was purchased as a single family Z development lot and is comparable in location to the subject. Sale No. 2 has steep slope LU cc M and a level building area. Sale No. 3 is a level fully developed building lot and is superior < :n LU in location and topography to the subject property. This property is situated within a -J U 0 U) a developed subdivision. U) UJ LU X, -J �- I The subject lot is not considered to have development potential as a single parcel. The U) off, I LU ; market value is based on the potential added value this parcel may have to adjacent parcels. Several sales of dysfunctional lots were researched, but only two sales are relevant ti il LL <. to the subject. One is a level lot with utilities that had an 18 foot fence encroachment that Ln rendered the lot unbuildable, and created a limited market for the property. The lot was =W1 sold by a local lender to a speculative investor for $20,000. The buyer indicated that the Z �- 0 lot is at risk and will require extensive legal work and costs. The other sale was a parcel of Z �- land that sold for $10,000, but the buyer and seller would not disclose details of the o LU LU transaction, making a direct comparison to the subject very difficult. 0-1 ADDENDUM TO ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS OBSERVED X F- Unless otherwise stated in this report, the existence of hazardous substances, including �L- 0 Z without limitation asbestos, radon, polychlorinated biphenyl's, petroleum leakage, or LU tus agriculture chemicals, which may or may not be present on the property, or other environmental conditions, were not called to the attention of nor did the appraisers become 0 Z aware of such during our inspection. The appraisers, however, are not qualified to detect such substances or conditions. If the presence of such substances, such as asbestos urea formaldehyde, foam insulation, or other hazardous substances or environmental conditions, may affect the value of the property, the value estimate is based on the assumption that there is no such condition on or in the property or in such proximity thereto that it would cause a loss of value. No responsibility is assumed for any such r conditions, or for any expertise or engineering knowledge required to discover them. The client is urged to retain an expert in the field of environmental impacts upon real estate if so desired. 0 CONDITIONS OF APPRAISAL COMMENTS This appraisal has been prepared with the property in "as is" condition. The appraisers assume the buyer is aware that this appraisal on the subject property does not serve as a warranty on the condition of the property, and is also aware that it is his responsibility to examine the property carefully and to take all necessary precautions before signing a contract, and that he is also aware that the estimate for repairs (if any) is a non -warranted opinion of the appraisers unless otherwise stated. Moreover, unless stated, this appraisal presumes that all improvements (if any) to the subject property have been made in conformance with the appropriate building codes, and that the appropriate permits have 0 L 0 w -i f'+I QLLJ 2� LL Q a xw �- y z t- OO' w Lu U Cnj u. p -' z ui N U _ o~ z t® been received as required by county or city ordinance. If an on -site well supplies the domestic, potable water, this appraisal presumes - unless stated that it conforms to the required standards for well capacity, and quality according to the appropriate governmental agencies. This report has been prepared in accordance with the standards and reporting requirements of the Office of Thrift Supervision. The purpose of this appraisal is to estimate Market Value as defined by the Office of Thrift Supervision Memo CFR12 563 & 571. APPRAISAL FUNCTION The function of this appraisal is to provide sufficient and supportable data for purposes of purchasing the subject property from the City of Edmonds. OBJECTIVE (PURPOSE) OF THE APPRAISAL The objective of this appraisal is to estimate the market value, as defined herein, of the fee simple title to the subject property. SCOPE OF THE APPRAISAL Inspection and research concerning the subject property; research Multiple Listing Services, Commercial Property Information Services, county records for information on comparable land sales; confirmation of sales data; and finishing a written appraisal with the assistance of a computer and appraisal software; and delivery of the completed appraisal. SELF CONTAINMENT This appraisal report is intended to be a self contained document, containing all information necessary to enable the reader to understand the appraisers' opinions. Any third party studies referred to, such as pest, hazardous materials, or structural reports have been verified by the appraisers to the extent the assumptions and conclusions are used. TREND ANALYSIS An analysis of marketing times and trends, although considered, are not discussed in the appraisal report. e 0 JQ !HMO 1 IT t 11, " v 1011 HIM uOUll 11H ­ - 1 W! it! t i 81 oz 11fal N. I I zo I . ; N I Ma. VV 0 i 1111 1 11- W W1 1 !1! 1.11-mi! 1 1CM -han .- � . it ; W1111 -g Salem so HIN Ml j;pl -1 12 . nm, , im! 1 i 3111- 1 HIM! IRIN 1 i1w Hit -110 1 my ;;H ! 1 gm m M-10 "l N imul W31 1 MUM toll 1H I yj 11wz NNJUHMI W Hit U MUN - CHUN, 1UNI 01HIAsa M 1 P, it it Hjqjj 1 1. SH W as f . - eo me I it 1; 11 awl h Sun 11 1111j, 1 Sul 1 .11 HIII d ilia! W"'Rol Mal 11111 Inly N lutil. Man; NINH 11USHINIIHn, 9_es ;J1112f Q H 1 W111 p QIE 11901 Intni 1 1 NNIH M MUSUN N 11 HUNIN 1. 111 J. cj!v 0 10"! laiul 1UNIHNNU!" offoam Ma"1111 111HUMS 1 :1 ."NI M lips u ij! NUMUM-N-1 1111HUNUMM�-giURLp.if Men !!!Huai c Ill , P HIMdS QQ S111H HIPH11 11111i Ef - - 32XI x M t) - _ ! £ » E y � .� .. ..... . |§ > 32x|O . 25x) .. . Legal Description HAN Z. PARK - PRD LEGAL DESCRIPTION - PORTIONS OF 184TH STREET SW & OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE TO BE VACATED THAT PORTION OF OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE AND 184TH STREET SW ADJOINING LOT 9 AND 10 BLOCK 1 ADMIRALTY ACRES ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 12 OF PLATS PAGE 48 RECORDS OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY WASHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 9; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT 9 ALONG A CURVE TO THE LEFT HAVING'A RADIUS OF 613.70 FEET AN ARC DISTANCE OF 26.63 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE S 00 59' 20" E ALONG SAID EAST LINE 50.00 FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT IN THE WEST LINE OF SAID OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE AND THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THIS DESCRIPTION; THENCE ALONG SAID WEST LINES 81 ° 00' 40" W 10.00 FEET, S 8059' 20" E 70.00 FEET, S 810 00' 40" W 10.00 FEET, S 8059' 20" E 175.15 FEET TO THE NORTH LINE OF 184TH STREET SW; THENCE N 890 07' 51" W ALONG SAID NORTH LINE 242.66 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 10; THENCE S 330 04' 19" E 24.11 FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID STREET; THENCE S 890 07'51 E ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE 252.98 FEET TO A POINT WHICH BEARS S 80 59' 20" E FROM THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE N 80 59' 20" W, PARALLEL WITH SAID OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE 269.06 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. i x 19343 S�ON1:4�--------1 [exrines 2/24/91 i t Topographic Map 3uv 00 EX. HOUSE D5 D:E:C� 7 ,0 N CQC0-j \Z ZA Ir :S 89*07*51- E N-ASL07L51" lk_ 3270 325 I rE�- HOUSE 6. Q Q 5 L9 U) I L- 'A ■ q7 . 141, ` R :`l613.70' {- T =1{1{13. 32 l =1} 26.63' t 4 EAST 212.66' 0 0 ti 6 rI 1tAdl Re 91 1M10' /' 19 EX. HOUSE l' w °'. , rn 101 DECCKK3 \ 1"" tP � 110 t`✓ tP aYv? 9 e .SEX. HOUSE l�dz 1m ,F yam° n lJ1 t P S 89'07'S1'-E— 89'07'51'* W 41(252.98')263.13' ..T • P Y`a R c 1D tL t. 1 0 ■,o m v Sl -0 / 2-0%11-00" s p i a � a m r� eP z-aas� G..: S pB� B r .. pB 54 A 4 2-0W B 70"t S.% g E J 2-009 B 4 �C Sp M P T! W IBIS}. PL S w U S SB Q B B d d 6 N l 182nd. ST. S.NC ,�/ p y ( ) B 182M R. SVl > a v •q /V BB 64 A I N 20/S I 2-J/T O /I/�G 19 x i --tl— -— 6f ES .!f g 2-061 2-017 /B R Bf 69 41 3 a a M p d z-a31 2-OM ui Comparable Sales ;: Comparable Sales o ® �❑ '32x0 25X Comparable sales 32 x 10 L7 LL01 LU - f LL <# �d s u, zM w w, � p U C 0 w wi a; U H h W_ 0 z w (n � T o z iO BA in Urban and Regional Planning, 1982 Graduate Emphasis in Site Planning and Subdivision Development Community Development BA in Economics, 1982 Graduate Emphasis in Urban and Regional Economics, Growth Analysis, Quantitative Analysis for market research. North Seattle Community College Income Property Appraisal, 1987 Real Estate Law, 1987 Washington Training Institute Real Estate Law, 1991 CURRENT EMPLOYMENT 1990 -Present Self Employed Bellevue, Washington Various job responsibilities include real estate development consulting for feasibility/highest and best use studies, assist in permit application process, property research and project management. Conduct expert witness testimony and property tax appeals for all Puget Sound Counties. Perform large scale and small scale market research analysis. Additional work in supporting the marketing of real estate projects through brokerage and property management. Extensive prior experience in real estate brokerage adds support to these functions. 1992 - Present Real Estate Appraisal Services Mountlake Terrace, Washington Title: Associate Real Estate Appraiser Duties: Real Estate Appraisal and market research analysis with an emphasis on commercial income property, land appraisals, subdivision development and absorption analysis. 0 ®' y5 W -i H I cn LL _ Q. p:� LL H LL,, Z H h- O Z W= U UY 0 F_ = tWj rF LLa Z ui N U = O~ Z ►9 C I® Job Description: Apartment acquisition coordinator, market research, feasibility studies and asset management for firm and investors. Assisted in project management for multifamily development. Assisted in the coordination of the development and partnership formation of 64 unit midrise apartment building, (Elliot Pointe in Seattle, WA), a joint venture with Holly Corporation of Tacoma, WA. Temporary position. 1992 Columbia Valuation Group Seattle, WA Title: Real Estate Appraiser Job Description: Real estate appraisal of commercial/industrial properties, subdivision development and apartment properties. Temporary position and worked on a contract basis. 1987 -1990 MS Cavoad Company Seattle, WA Commercial Real Estate Brokerage and Consulting Title: Real Estate Sales Associate Job Description: Specializing in the brokerage of larger apartment communities throughout the Puget Sound Region. Sold several large apartment complexes and land for apartment and subdivision development. Also provided extensive market research and analysis for the firm and its clients. Conducted weekly rental surveys of apartment complexes by region and market research of local employment and economic trends. 1985 -1987 Wallace and Wheeler Inc. Bellevue, WA Job Description: Commercial Real Estate Brokerage of multifamily, commercial and mobile home parks. Mortgage and finance brokerage. 1983 -1984 Johnstown Properties Mercer Island, Washington Main Office - Atlanta, GA Title: Northwest Division Marketing Representative and Business Manager Job Description: Property management and property acquisition analysis of large northwest apartment communities and market research analysis. Total northwest portfolio exceeded 3000 units Cn LL { pUJ Q LL �d F- S z_ F- o, w UJ o — UJ S U NF LLa �z ui cn U = or z EDUCATION Shoreline Community College — Specialized courses in real estate subject matter North Seattle Community College — Specialized courses in real estate subject matter Condemnation Appraisal,1993, Highline Community College, Bill Webster, WDOT Instructor Easement Valuation, 1993, SRWA American Institute of Real Estate Appraisal — Real Estate Appraisal Principles American Institute of Real Estate Appraisal — Basic Valuation Procedures American Institute of Real Estate Appraisal — Capitalization Theory and Techniques, Part A American Institute of Real Estate Appraisal — Capitalization Theory and Techniques, Part B American Institute of Real Estate Appraisal — Case Studies in Real Estate Valuation American Institute of Real Estate Appraisal — Standards of Professional Practice American Institute of Real Estate Appraisal — Valuation Analysis and Report Writing American Institute of Real Estate Appraisal — Also: Discounted Cash Flow Analysis; Investment Analysis; Applied Sales Comparison Approach; Appraising for Pension Funds; Subdivision Analysis; Rates, Ratios, and Reasonableness; Comprehensive Appraisal Workshop PROFESSIONAL. DESIGNATION Member Appraisal Institute, MAI General Certified Appraiser, Washington State, #270-11 MC-MA-HM J458DK AFFILIATIONS American Institute for Economic Research Hoover Institute International Right of Way Association EXPERIENCE Columbia Valuation Group, Seattle, WA, Founding Principal. Seafirst Bank, Seattle, WA, Assistant Vice President and Senior Appraisal Officer — Real estate advisory and appraisal services. The Coulton Company, Seattle and Bellevue, WA, Managing Partner --- Appraisal, feasibility study, and real estate advisory services. Coulton, Kelling & Wuestoff, Seattle, WA, Market ResearcherlAppraiser — Appraisal and appraisal support services. v APPLICATION ROUTING FORM FILE: ST-96-78 AND CHECKLIST FROM: PLANNING ROUTED T0: ' ` ' 1996 Engineering 613/96 "' IRI_IG WORKS DEpT Fire ,_, 6J3196 Parks et Rec. 6J3/96 Staff Comments: ')tl ' ' W ifl c - L f RETURNED Engineeringr>T f99, Fire Public Works Parks et Rec. MA,..trprj ue- P6o�c.Pr - U'T-1`Irryy �AC}+� •.iis � -n4is peep ( 2 *Additional Information Required for Complete Applit;ation c. �n.n ui lu r, tis . \ *Additional Studies Required to Complete Review Owner • Property Address_7704 OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE • Date of Application 5/30/96 • Type STREET VACATION • Hearing Required:YesX_ No Date of Hearing (if known) X Application Site Plan for Short Subdivision (8.5 x 11) X Fee _X—Site Plan (11 x 17) X APO List Legals (Existing & Proposed) Title Report Environmental Assessment X Vicinity Map Proof of 2-Year Occupancy (ADU) Elevations Declarations (Variance & C. U. P.) Petition (Official Street Map) X Environmental Checklist Critical Areas Determination OTHER COMMENTS THIS APPLICATION IS IN CONJUNCTION WITH ST-Vb-78 AN APPLICATION FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE OFFICIAL STREET MAP. THERE ARE OVERSIZED DRAWINGS IN THE PLANNING DEPT. i �o a APPLICATION ROUTING FORM FILE: ST-96-78 AND CHECKLIST FROM: PLANNIN%rr►=.,, ,,4T ROUTED TO: Fire 6/3/96 Public Works 6/3/96 Parks 8L Rec. 6/3/96 Staff Comments: 5w co Yme7 rS t=o/C ST96-77 guy 5 tqp RETURNED Engineering Fire Public Works Parks 81 Rec._ C�liN Q;r"/3 j 9� *Additional Information Required for Complete Application *Additional Studies Required to Complete Review • Owner Property Address 7704 OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE Date of Application 5/30/96 Type STREET VACATION Hearing Required:YesX_ No Date of Hearing (if known) X Application Site Plan for Short Subdivision (8.5 x 11) X Fee X Site Plan (11 x 17) X APO List Legals (Existing & Proposed) Title Report Environmental Assessment X Vicinity Map Proof of 2-Year Occupancy (ADU) Elevations Declarations (Variance & C. U. P.) Petition (Official Street Map) X Environmental Checklist Critical Areas Determination OTHER COMMENTS THIS APPLICATION IS IN CONJUNCTION WITH ST-96-78 AN APPLICATION FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE OFFICIAL STREET MAP. THERE ARE OVERSIZED DRAWINGS IN THE PLANNING DEPT. APPLICATION ROUTING FORM FILE: ST-96-78 AND CHECKLIST FROM: PLANNING ROUTED TO: Engineering_ Fire Public Works 613/96 Parks a Rec. _ 613/96 Staff Comments: RETURNED Engineering Fire Public Works Parks 8i Rec. *Additional Information Required for Complete Application *Additional Studies Required to Complete Review 0 Owner • Property Address 7704 0LYMPIC VIEW DRIVE • Date of Application 5/30/96 Type STREET VACATION Hearing Required:Yes._X— No Date of Hearing (if known) X Application Site Plan for Short Subdivision (8.5 x 11) X Fee --A—Site Plan (11 x 17) X APO List Legals (E)isting & Proposed) Title Report Environmental Assessment X Vicinity Map Proof of 2-Year Occupancy (ADU) Elevations Declarations (Variance & C. U. P.) Petition (Official Street Map) X Environmental Checklist Critical Areas Determination OTHER COMMENTS THIS APPLICATION IS IN CONJUNCTION WITH ST-96-78 AN APPLICATION FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE OFFICIAL STREET MAP. THERE ARE OVERSIZED DRAWINGS IN THE PLANNING DEPT. L% i IQ = z' r LU w = Jv (-) O (1)a cn w LU cn u UJ Lt W �_. Z F- r 0 Z �- ww �p � A 0 - i Ul u. 0 _Z VT Z K9A city of ed,;fonds } �- land use application ❑ ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD 0. Y + ❑ COMP PLAN AMENDMENT ❑ CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FILE #-5'f- �I,{ -7 _ZONE ❑ HOME OCCUPATION ❑ FORMAL SUBDIVISION DATE REC'D BY ❑ SHORT SUBDIVISION I.ram ❑ LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT FE RECEIPT# _ UL ta' PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT HE RING DATE ❑ OFFICIAL STREET MAP AMENDMENT / TREET VACATIQtV� HE ❑ STAFF ❑ PB ❑ ADB X'CC ❑ REZONE ❑ SHORELINE PERMIT ACTION TAKEN: ❑ VARIANCE / REASONABLE USE EXCEPTION ❑ APPROVED ❑ DENIED ❑ APPEALED ❑ OTHER APPEAL# Applicant Phone _ '776 - 3d¢ / Address SZ S_, T l&o f Za l , .Ws , 1,VA 98o2 G Property Address or Location 770 -* D/ ti, 1c. Vi e. w 2D v Q 91A 98 Property Owner/417HZ.'24?01na K. r�av-k Phone '77¢ _ 0/39 Address _ 7 -4- mly. t!:!e 1u 1/1— Driv-e i'VA 9S ox C. Agent --Jo W. /t/P Aot - Phone 775'— 5"3/7 Address b G 5a v Ga WA Sec zo TaxAcc# 3708-oo/-ao 9--4Po06 Sec. /S Two. 27A1 Rng. 4-F_ Legal Description 4 Details of Projector Proposed Use R /wl d e/ e.ldle c/ b/ate �7 o W to Cy"5 j i'/1 'bl' _ e "!/t 7 i s d t �y Ltd a, / h Q 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 application. SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT/ OWNER/ AGENT W Date: June 91996 To: Planning Division From: Gordy Hk/de, Engineering Coordinator Subject: Street Map Amendment for Charles Maki The application has been reviewed by the Engineering Division. The application should be revised to reflect three requested actions �1) vacation of Olympic View Drive right-of-way, (2) revision of the street map to remove the proposed right-of- way connecting OVD to 80th Ave. W., and (3) vacation of 184th St. S.W. right -of - The Division has the following requirements/recommendations regarding this proposal: - 9Theright-of-way adjacent to Olympic View Drive should not bevacated, os itieneeded for slope protection above the roadway. Analternative would bmtovacate the wider riQh and provide otwenty toforty foot wide slope easement. *The proposed hght-of*»ovbetween CVDand GOthAve. W.can bo removed. oThe unopened 184thSt. 8.W.h0 lying east ofthe proposed plat road can bevacated provided outility easement ieretained. The unopened hQ lying west ofthe proposed plat road can bavacated, provided the plat road hmmade public and there iaopedesthan/bikaaccess easement and construction between the proposed plat road and the westerly boundary ofthe proposed plat. ` The application ionot considered complete until these issues are o|adfiud. Perhaps the applicant should make two applications, one for vacation and one for street map amendment. ccrYoF EDmOmnS ENGINEYMGoIVISIOm � 0 i Notice of Development Application & Public Hearing Date of Notice: June 28, 1996 File # ST-96-77 & ST-96-78 t Applicant Information Permit Information Name of Applicant :................ :D Charles Maki Requested Permits ® Street Map Amendment & Street - Date of Applications............_ a 5/30/96 and Approvals:—. ............... Vacation j i 'gate application Complete: 6/28/96 Other Required Permits not * Unknown j .... �. -Project yet applied for (if known):. Location:------, 0 Adjacent to, or across 7704 Olympic Required Studies related !D NIA View Or., 18325 80th Ave. W. & to the 18408 79th PI. W. project:. .................... Project Description: ............... 0 A Street Map Amendment to remove Related Environmental C, SEPA and Critical Areas ChecklistProtaa { right -of Documents:........................ Olympic Mew r Ave. W. Men a View Dr. a Ave. W. Also. a Stmet street vacetweto vacate ma eastern 1/2 of cat St. between Olympia View Dr. a Sam Ave.184t Ave. a 81hat ponlon of unused rightrof-way cf- on the weel side of Olympic VIM Dr. extending Mfeet north of the 184th St, } right-of-way Public Hearing Information / {'Date: July 12, 1996 Time: 9:00 A.M. Place: Community Services Conference Room, 250 5th Avenue North , i The decis on on th s de elgpm nt application will be made within 12adaps ofthe time ofthe Letter ofCmulahneness, with allowances made farstrrtltes aqd -yrdd{tt n 7.+�(tios+gption regugstaj Notathat ability to appeata deaisron ts,cont+pgent upon parttapipJ n the pet»jlt deytsion proaeys The removal, mutilation, destruction, or concealment of this This notice may be removed Warning! notice before the hearing date Is a misdemeanor punishable by aften�yly 12 1996 fine and imprisonment. EDMO S ITY OF 250 5 Ave N UNITED STATES POSTAL SER 850 Cherry Ave Roland & Julie Brown Edmo WA 98020 San Bruno, CA 94099 7809 Z82nd P1 SW Edmonds, WA 98026 z t1 ¢ Z David Johnson 7810 182nd P1 SW Lars & Paulette Johnson 8514 192nd Kathleen O'Bryan w- Edmonds, WA 98026 St SW Edmonds, WA 98026 7817 Z82nd Pi SW cc g; Edmonds, WA 98026 Uj o' Wallace Danielson Jr. N w s Susan Danielson Jr. 7822 182nd P1 SW John & Muriel Quick Gary & Charlene'Ramm (n U. �( Edmonds, WA 98026 7914 18�nd PI SW Edmonds, WA 98026 18418 79th Pi W w Edmonds, WA 98026 LL Linda McCullough Dana Gillet 18426 79th PI W PO Box ?026 Norman Barringer s'' zF. Edmonds, WA 98026 I, Lynnwood, WA 98046 18405 79th Pi W Edmonds, WA 98026 w w! ma Richard & Tina O'Neill Robert Joss o W` 18414 79th PI W Z8415 79th P1 W Glenn Roberts 0 Wi Edmonds, WA. 98026 Edmonds, WA 98026 Ave W Uj x U1i Edmore s, w Edmonds, WA 98026 u. p' U �j ca z John Heuerman 18419 79th Pl W�P ._ William k s ---Katherine- 1�427 �� Morley i- � z Edmonds, WA 98026 79th Pl W - Edmonds, WA 98026 18203 80th Ave W Edmonds, WA 98026 Arne Goedecke 1722 NE 145th St #201 Seattle, WA 98155 A Earl Smith 0 18325 80th Ave W Edmonds, WA 98026 Nan & Regina Park 7704 Olympic View Dr. to Edmonds, WA 98026 F A & Gloria Lafond 18227 80th Ave W Edmonds, WA 98026 U S P SERVICE 8SO Ch ry Ave San B , CA 94099 John Mellor 606 Sater Mane Edmonds, WA 98020 James Thompson 18305 80th Ave W Edmonds, WA 98026 Charles Maki 8235 Talbot Rd. Edmonds, WA 98026 APPLICATION ROUTING FORM AND CHECKLIST ROUTED TO: Engmeenng 6yy P"fic Works Parks 81 Rec._6/3196 Staff b i FILE: ST-96-78 FROM: PLANNING!, [�I�7 ���' RETURNED �►�. Engineerin RECEIVED Fire 6, Public w. ks JJUUN� 3 1 8 Parks ex Rec. =0.40NDS FIRE nrr *Additional information Required for Complete Application *Additional Studies Required to Complete Review • Owner • Property Address 7704 OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE • Date of Application 5/30/96 • Type- STREET VACATION • Hearing Required:Yes--X— No Date of Hearing (if known) X Application Site Plan for Short Subdivision (8.5 x 11) X Fee X Site Plan (11 x 17) X APO List Legals (Existing & Proposed) Title Report Environmental Assessment X Vicinity Map Proof of 2-Year Occupancy (ADU) Elevations Declarations (Variance & C. U. P.) Petition (Official Street Map) X Environmental Checklist Critical Areas Determination OTHER COMMENTS THIS APPLICATION IS IN CONJUNCTION WITH ST-963AN APPLICATION FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE OFFICIAL STREET MAP. THERE ARE OVERSIZED DRAWINGS IN THE PLANNING DEPT. 0 x � APPLICATION ROUTING FORM FILE: ST-96.78 AND CHECKLIST FROM: PLANNING�. -/" . s. ROUTED TO: Engineering. Fire_ Public Wporks613j/96 'F,7.Pe�1141`i�t�ill�'iiYe''ui•a�' �:,�i, Staff *Additional Information Required for *Additional Studies Required to Complete Review • Owner A v�y RETURNED /t�yj�6 r996 Engineering Fire Public Works Parks 82 Rec. •_ Property Address 7704 OLYMPIC VIEW D►21VE • Date of Application 5/30/96 • Type STREET VACATION Hearing Required:YesX_ No Date of Hearing (if known) X Application APPLICATION ROUTING FORM FILE: ST-96.78 AND CHECKLIST FROM: PLANNING�. -/" . s. ROUTED TO: Engineering. Fire_ Public Wporks613j/96 'F,7.Pe�1141`i�t�ill�'iiYe''ui•a�' �:,�i, Staff *Additional Information Required for *Additional Studies Required to Complete Review • Owner A v�y RETURNED /t�yj�6 r996 Engineering Fire Public Works Parks 82 Rec. •_ Property Address 7704 OLYMPIC VIEW D►21VE • Date of Application 5/30/96 • Type STREET VACATION Hearing Required:YesX_ No Date of Hearing (if known) X Application Site Plan for Short Subdivision (8.5 x 11) X Fee X Site Plan (11 x 17) X APO List Legals (Existing & Proposed) Title Report Environmental Assessment X Vicinity Map Proof of 2-Year Occupancy (ADU) Elevations Declarations (Variance & C. U. P.) Petition (Official Street Map) X Environmental Checklist Critical Areas Determination OTHER COMMENTS THIS APPLICATION IS IN CONJUNCTION WITH ST-96-78 AN APPLICATION FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE OFFICIAL STREET MAP. THERE ARE OVERSIZED DRAWINGS IN THE PLANNING DEPT. �> > W. LQIA = 0i V �. w' -3 H cn LL 0 w� U- d; W' z_ I- �- 0: W LU `2 Q. v �{ a� iW +z iu m Us o~ z rst. 1S9v CITY OF EDMONDS 250 5TH AVENUE NORTH • EDMOND5, WA 68020 • 4206► 771.0220 • FAX (206) 771.0221 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT Public .Works • Planning • Parks and Recreation a Engineering June 28, 1996 Charles Maki 8235 Talbot Rd. Edmonds, WA 98026 Subject: ASSIGNMENT OF HEARING DATE Dear Mr. Maki: BARBARA FAHEY MAYOR Your application is now complete and has been scheduled for public hearing at the time and place listed below. Action: Street Vacation File No. Assigned: ST-96-78 Date of Hearing: August 20. 1996 Time: 7:00 P.M. , or as soon thereafter as possible. Place: Plaza Room, Edmonds Library 650 Main Street Hearing Body: City Council 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 moved to the end of the agenda. Items not reached by the end of the hearing will be continued to the following month's agenda. If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact Kirk Vinish, Project Planner at 771- 0220. Sincerely, Community Services Department - Planning Division Jef rey S. Wilson, AICP Current Planning Supervisor pc: File No. ST 96-78 Kirk Vinish, Project Planner ST96.78.00C 06/2M6.00RRESVM0T10E a Incorporated August 11, 1890 a Sister Cities international — Hekinan, Japan OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON WE, the undersigned, owners of two-thirds of the real property abutting upon that public right-of-way described below, do hereby petition the City of Edmonds to vacate said public right-of-way, described as follows: Uj -Jf—1 all situate in the City of Edmonds, County of Snohomish, State of Washington, U) LL 01 and request that said City Council by Resolution fix a time and place when this LU Petition shall be heard and determined by that authority, which time shall not be more than sixty (60) days nor less than twenty (20) days after the passage of such Resolution. LL These pages are a group of pages containing an identical text and prayer intended LU by the signers of this Petition to be presented and considered as one Petition and may be filed with other pages containing additional signatures which z F cumulatively may be considered as a single Petition. 1-0. z �_: WARNING: Every person who signs this Petition with any other than his true LU LW name, or who knowingly signs more than one of these Petitions, or signs,a petition seeking an election when he is not a legal voter, or signs a petition when he is otherwise not qualified to'sign, or who makes herein any false 0 statement, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. Lu LU PRAYER OF PETITION: For the vacation of LL SIGNATURE* PRINTED NAME ADDRESS DATE Z! . . I //.>/-? lv'e 0 2. 3. � & 4<7 Z. Ag)�c_ 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. *See special instructions on cover sheet. 10/22/84 0 z h, z' w ��, m m 8❑❑❑❑❑®®®®®®® n Ila �$ z� 18 �N o LL E ❑ s a� a N yy a z ❑❑❑o❑❑�� x$�ia ow goo e n m❑ Lia a� .. .. ... ro n e m bj i ay eN ro o t ®F ADDENDUM TO NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS The subject property is located within the City of Edmonds. The neighborhood boundaries z it are considered to be 76th Avenue West to the east, Puget Sound to the West, Edmonds Way to the South and Meadowdale Beach Drive to the north. This neighborhood is w comprised primarily of single family dwellings reflecting average to good condition and quality. Many of the residences to the west have views of the Puget Sound and the 00 Olympic Mountains to the west. Access to employment, shopping and schools make this tn w; neighborhood competitive in the market place. Mixed land use in the neighborhood is well � t- q balanced and typical for this suburban area with no negative impact on appeal. The Cn p 1 overall marketing appeal for the subject market area is considered to be good. a {{ ADDENDUM TO SITE COMMENTS AND HIGHEST AND BEST USE cn p Y' zThe subject site is currently recorded as an unimproved public right-of-way extension of Z 0 184th Street SW. The site is an angled rectangle with dimensions of approximately 10 feet by 70 feet along Olympic View Drive and widens to 20 feet for a distance of 175.17 feet a south along Olympic View Drive. At this point the property angles 90 degrees sharp to the U v�;. a west for approximately 263.13 feet and is approximately 20 feet wide for this distance. - The estimated total site area is approximately 9,400 square feet. The property is z c unimproved with heavy vegetative ground cover, and various tree species. The site slope is u~_.. moderately steep along Olympic View Drive and then becomes a steep slope to the west up z' an embankment. The site terraces in two places in the westerly direction with two sections with moderately steep slope. The site elevation peaks at mid -point traveling west and o r. z begins to slope downward to the west end of the site boundary. The initial elevation gain from the eastern boundary is approximately 40 feet west to the first plateau, and then the site is flat for approximately 70 feet. At this point the site slopes approximately 20 feet downward to the western boundary. ` The Highest and Best Use of the subject site is restricted due to the configuration and - -----� topography. This narrow right-of-way configuration limits the site use. The steep °- topography would appear to hinder the development of a right-of-way for public use. It l appears that the highest and best use would be as additional site area for adjacent © residential zoned property. This site does not appear to have any residential development capacity due to the narrow configuration. COMMENTS ON MARKET DATA AND COMPARABLE SALES All comparable sales are superior legal building lots, but they are comparable in location to t ® the subject. Adjustments are made to reflect the differences in site utility and development potential. Adjustment are as follows: 1. Each sale is adjusted downward for superior functional and development utility. 2. Each sale is adjusted downward for the difference in site area to reflect the difference in site utility for larger lots. z It Sale No. 1 has percolation and slope problems. This site was purchased as a single family r development lot and is comparable in location to the subject. Sale No. 2 has steep slope cc 2 and a level building area. Sale No. 3 is a level fully developed building lot and is superior oin location and topography to the subject property. This property is situated within a 0 developed subdivision. Ln LnL LU -J �, The subject lot is not considered to have development potential as a single parcel. The wof market value is based on the potential added value this parcel may have to adjacent n � parcels. Several sales of dysfunctional lots were researched, but only two sales are relevant = Q to the subject. One is a level lot with utilities that had an 18 foot fence encroachment that 0, rendered the lot unbuildable, and created a limited market for the property. The lot was zLn �— = sold by a local lender to a speculative investor for $20,000. The buyer indicated that the Z ~ lot is at risk and will require extensive legal work and costs. The other sale was a parcel of z o land that sold for $10,000, but the buyer and seller would not disclose details of the transaction, making a direct comparison to the subject very difficult. o t—t ADDENDUM TO ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS OBSERVED LU w F+' Unless otherwise stated in this report, the existence of hazardous substances, including — O z without limitation asbestos, radon, polychlorinated biphenyl's, petroleum leakage, or LU U) agriculture chemicals, which may or may not be present on the property, or other v= P r-' environmental conditions, were not called to the attention of nor did the appraisers become z aware of such during our inspection. The appraisers, however, are not qualified to detect such substances or conditions. If the presence of such substances, such as asbestos urea formaldehyde, foam insulation, or other hazardous substances or environmental conditions, may affect the value of the property, the value estimate is based on the assumption that there is no such condition on or in the property or in such proximity j thereto that it would cause a loss of value. No responsibility is assumed for any such conditions, or for any expertise or engineering knowledge required to discover them. The client is urged to retain an expert in the field of environmental impacts upon real estate if so desired. 0 CONDITIONS OF APPRAISAL COMMENTS This appraisal has been prepared with the property in "as is" condition. The appraisers assume the buyer is aware that this appraisal on the subject property does not serve as a warranty on the condition of the property, and is also aware that it is his responsibility to d G� examine the property carefully and to take all necessary precautions before signing a contract, and that he is also aware that the estimate for repairs (if any) is a non -warranted opinion of the appraisers unless otherwise stated. Moreover, unless stated, this appraisal presumes that all improvements (if any) to the subject property have been made in conformance with the appropriate building codes, and that the appropriate permits have 0 been received as required by county or city ordinance. If an on -site well supplies the domestic, potable water, this appraisal presumes - unless stated - that it conforms to the required standards for well capacity, and quality according to the appropriate governmental agencies. This report has been prepared in accordance with the standards and reporting requirements of the Office of Thrift Supervision. The purpose of this appraisal is to estimate Market Value as defined by the Office of Thrift Supervision Memo CFR12 563 & 571. APPRAISAL FUNCTION The function of this appraisal is to provide sufficient and supportable data for purposes of purchasing the subject property from the City of Edmonds. OBJECTIVE (PURPOSE) OF THE APPRAISAL The objective of this appraisal is to estimate the market value, as defined herein, of the fee simple title to the subject property. SCOPE OF THE APPRAISAL Inspection and research concerning the subject property; research Multiple Listing Services, Commercial Property Information Services, county records for information on comparable land sales; confirmation of sales data; and finishing a written appraisal with the assistance of a computer and appraisal software, and delivery of the completed appraisal. SELF CONTAINMENT This appraisal report is intended to be a self contained document, containing all information necessary to enable the reader to understand the appraisers' opinions. Any third party studies referred to, such as pest, hazardous materials, or structural reports have been verified by the appraisers to the extent the assumptions and conclusions are used. TREND ANALYSIS An analysis of marketing times and trends, although considered, are not discussed in the. appraisal report. 4 ®'.; yo No I ANT, d. laLl !Uhl i If ill; t 1 to 11 1 ' " �! i I On HIM! i a 1 ! 1111gi MMSIN HIM im 1 � M4 [hull 1 !j; 1 70 11 1; ; mill I HUN IN! f !a qA g 11 a .; jHp Urn HIM dill: it! 8 W.. !M Oil 1 11 H 81 ! !Mli! !III! mumv, ,, , U 1; ; WISH mil HIM TH! gia i IOU!!; Hill: 1 NUIN111 JIM M! IBM mull"mHum lit is I MW VIE n1finlim 1 H I HlOn U 1 ;11 114 n t mp 1 inly MUM", WHA KNIMUNHH. His H fe t0m.11 HIM M! Muil. M' —"- I-M im! 1 Sul is !HH" min Mud Mum; 9.1"ll MS. OHMS if 1 MiAn WOM".. Italul ORIBUIn YJ 01 Minil is MIUMM MUM- HE MIMAIN! 11 JIHJ INIM I Is, . .. .. 1=11"lerg' g aill!"MIN11 IMUNNI 11HIHIMM11" . . —!— H"gg MH inn; MUM le"PUMUMM, 110BI'm MUMMA IM �pinpl-igasi�ll 3.111U11111 !pHs-nap"I" fgh, i !plum 88,£8gmg -M" MUf"m"­ 201 2,91 2. 8 It, a to iv � M. .1-1 "In W . H �m I Slop"! MM 32 X 25x M . . , _ \\ \ | t E , 2 |O2x|O 2ix[a ... r e:72 Legal Description HAN Z. PARK - PRD LEGAL DESCRIPTION PORTIONS OF 184TH STREET SW & OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE TO BE VACATED THAT PORTION OF OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE AND 184TH STREET SW ADJOINING LOT 9 AND 10 BLOCK 1 ADMIRALTY ACRES ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 12 OF PLATS PAGE 48 RECORDS OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY WASHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 0: THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT 9 ALONG A CURVE TO THE LEFT HAVING A RADIUS OF 613.70 FEET AN ARC DISTANCE OF 26.63 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE S 00 59' 20" E ALONG SAID EAST LINE 50.00 FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT IN THE WEST LINE OF SAID OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE AND THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THIS DESCRIPTION; THENCE ALONG SAID WEST LINES 81000' 40" W 10.00 FEET, S 8059' 20"E 70.00 FEET, S 810 00' 40" W 10.00 FEET, S 80 59' 20" E 175.15 FEET TO THE NORTH LINE OF 184TH STREET SW; THENCE N 890 07' 51 W ALONG SAID NORTH LINE 242.66 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 10: THENCE S 330 04' 19" E 24.11 FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID STREET; THENCE S 890 07' 51" E ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE 252.98 FEET TO A POINT WHICH BEARS S 80 59' 20" E FROM THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE N 80 59' 20" W, PARALLEL WITH SAID OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE 269.06 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. �pF WAS �O t /9343 earaais 2/24/9-f Atnc,nornrlo Dln+ KAnr% �t `HOUSE l Survey Map 0 ■co 0 1. K n /J . ♦9 v\ n\ Comparable Sales o Comparable Sales ®� B® -,32XID _ Comparable Sales ®� B® -,32XID _ N IS P EAS NT N/L 8 28 17 g 3 8 9 /O 1/z t/ 12 23 Off_' 093 / IT ., n. /! 166th PL. S. W. 6 T /I /8 # YS 0 m 3 6 £ MAD WOE z ! i s 6 f 8 C tB R 0 3 f J 6 z t9 0 r T !/ !0 1 s _ST. .Bl]tL__._____________—____ � oz • 06 I o2 L— oS I os os i 1 M { tl i n i /a 168tb PL. J ' {___� I I a 1 tt ( I /6 hII ! L__ 8 T 6 zz 11 DOW-Ls#PK Comparable Sales '❑ 3225X w0 a 0O V) o: U) w Lu S' U) LL Lu 0. LL 3# rLLJ =. z t- h O' Z Lu Lu g o, 0 - a rl LLI S U HM u- 0 - Z LU 0) 0 z M1 Eastern Washington University BA in Urban and Regional Planning, 1982 Graduate Emphasis in Site Planning and Subdivision Development Community Development BA in Economics, 1982 Graduate Emphasis in Urban and Regional Economics, Growth Analysis, Quantitative Analysis for market research. North Seattle Community College Income Property Appraisal, 1987 Real Estate Law, 1987 Washington Training Institute Real Estate Law, 1991 CURRENT EMPLOYMENT 1990 -Present Self Employed Bellevue, Washington Various job responsibilities include real estate development consulting for feasibility/highest and best use studies, assist in permit application process, property research and project management. Conduct expert witness testimony and property tax appeals for all Puget Sound Counties. Perform large scale and small scale market research analysis. Additional work in supporting the marketing of real estate projects through brokerage and property management. Extensive prior experience in real estate brokerage adds support to these functions. 1992 - Present Real Estate Appraisal Services Mountlake Terrace, Washington Title: Associate Real Estate Appraiser Duties: Real Estate Appraisal and market research analysis with an emphasis on commercial income property, land appraisals, subdivision development and absorption analysis. EMPLOYMENT HISTORY 1992 -1993 Tridor Inc. Bellevue, WA Title: Vice President of Acquisitions Job Description: Apartment acquisition coordinator, market research, feasibility studies and asset management for firm and investors. Assisted in project management for multifamily development. Assisted in the coordination of the development and partnership formation of 64 unit midrise apartment building, (Elliot Pointe in Seattle, WA), a joint venture with Holly Corporation of Tacoma, WA. Temporary position. 1992 Columbia Valuation Group Seattle, WA Title: Real Estate Appraiser Job Description: Real estate appraisal of commercial/industrial properties, subdivision development and apartment properties. Temporary position and worked on a contract basis. 1987 -1990 MS Cavoad Company Seattle, WA Commercial Real Estate Brokerage and Consulting Title: Real Estate Sales Associate Job Description: Specializing in the brokerage of larger apartment communities throughout the Puget Sound Region, Sold several large apartment complexes and land for apartment and subdivision development. Also provided extensive market research and analysis for the firm and its clients. Conducted weekly rental surveys of apartment complexes by region and market research of local employment and economic trends. 1985 -1987 Wallace and Wheeler Inc. Bellevue, WA Job Description: Commercial Real Estate Brokerage of multifamily, commercial and mobile home parks. Mortgage and finance brokerage. 1983 -1984 Johnstown Properties Mercer Island, Washington Main Office - Atlanta, GA Title: Northwest Division Marketing Representative and Business Manager Job Description: Property management and property acquisition analysis of large northwest apartment communities and market research analysis, Total northwest portfolio exceeded 3000 units ..._ ,.... .. ,+. .. .,.. ..v .C.:. 1. ... „._, ,. ... ..... ,.. ,. - � * .. .,... ... .. - '� PRINCIPAL QUALIFICATIONS Michael J. McMahon, MAI EDUCATION Shoreline Community College — Specialized courses in real estate subject matter North Seattle Community College — Specialized courses in real estate subject matter Condemnation Appraisal,1993, Highline Community College, Bill Webster, WDOT Instructor Easement Valuation,1993, SRWA American Institute of Real Estate Appraisal — Real Estate Appraisal Principles American Institute of Real Estate Appraisal — Basic Valuation Procedures American Institute of Real Estate Appraisal — Capitalization Theory and Techniques, Part A American Institute of Real Estate Appraisal — Capitalization Theory and Techniques, Part B American Institute of Real Estate Appraisal — Case Studies in Real Estate Valuation American Institute of Real Estate Appraisal — Standards of Professional Practice American Institute of Real Estate Appraisal — Valuation Analysis and Report Writing American Institute of Real Estate Appraisal — Also: Discounted Cash Flow Analysis; Investment Analysis; Applied Sales Comparison Approach; Appraising for Pension Funds; Subdivision Analysis; Rates, Ratios, and Reasonableness; Comprehensive Appraisal Workshop PROFESSIONAL DESIGNATION Member Appraisal Institute, MAI General Certified Appraiser, Washington State, #270-11 MC-MA-HM-j458DK AFFILIATIONS American Institute for Economic Research Hoover Institute International Right of Way Association EXPERIENCE Columbia Valuation Group, Seattle, WA, Founding Principal. Seafirst Bank, Seattle, WA, Assistant Vice President and Senior Appraisal Officer — Real estate advisory and appraisal services. The Coulton Company, Seattle and Bellevue, WA, Managing Partner — Appraisal, feasibility study, and real estate advisory services. Coulton, Kelling & Wuestoff, Seattle, WA, Market Researcher/Appraiser — Appraisal and appraisal support services. va.+.au u rai Cau rVBllit., aax 250 5t Ave N 850 Ch ry Ave Edmore s, WA 98020 San B n , CA 94099 David Johnson Lars & Paulette Johnson 7810 182nd P1 SW 8514 192nd St SW Edmonds, WA 98026 Edmonds, WA" 98026 Wallace Danielson Jr. Susan Danielson Jr. John & Muriel Quick 7822 182nd Pl SW 7914 182nd P1 SW Edmonds, WA 98026 Edmonds, WA 98026 Linda McCullough Dana Gillet 18426 79th P1 W PO Box 7026 Edmonds, WA 98026 Lynnwood, WA 98046 Richard & Tina O'Neill RobertJoss 18414 79th P1 W 18415 79th Pl W Edmonds, WA 98026 Edmonds, WA 98026 John Heuerman William Oakes 18419 79th P1 W 18427 79th P1 W Edmonds, WA 98026 Edmonds, WA 98026 Arne Goedecke F A & Gloria Lafond 1722 NE 145th St #201 18227 80th Ave W Seattle, WA 98155 Edmonds, WA 98026 Earl Smith U S POSTAL SERVICE 18325 80th Ave W 850 Cherry Ave Edmonds, WA 98026 San Bruno, CA 94099 Han & Regina Park John Mellor 7704 Olympic View Dr. 606 Sater lane Edmonds, WA 98026 Edmonds, WA 98020 xviana & uuiie brown 7809 182nd P1 SW Edmonds, WA 98026 Kathleen O'Bryan 7817 182nd P1 SW Edmonds, WA 98026 Gary & Charlene Ramm 18418 79th Pl 'W Edmonds, WA 98026 Norman Barringer 18405 79th P1 W Edmonds, WA 98026 Glenn Roberts 18416 78th Ave W Edmonds, WA 98026 Katherine Morley 18203 80th Ave W Edmonds, WA 98026 James Thompson 18305 80th Ave W Edmonds, WA 98026 Charles Maki 8235 Talbot Rd. Edmonds, WA 98026 0 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS LIST Attach this notarized declaratiori to the adjacent property owners list On my; oath, I certify that the names and addresses provided represent all properties. located within 300 feet of the subject property. Signature of Applica t or Applicant's Representative Subscribed and swom to before me thirKJ'0 day of 196 , Notary Public in and for the State of Washington Residing at------�'-+ PUBLtC ASWlNGTON E 0CK pirem MAY 30,1997 � � t �a 4 Sf L� 3 1 APO.doc\LATempWbrms F�jr'�tlr .54�y'm 3} _¢ Y;} t. / 2 01 Z.! t OZ o1 j z 3; Y p _ Oth PL S. , 02 BJOs-o s ¢ 3 T1s GOTNI 4 LIJ U 2 o ADD. 4 — 03 w H 3 w 3 5 i QZ t. .. , (4 82J Tol6ogo � �, ai -- i--- 1 g 03 Oi � . ' L. S.W. d 5 2 L- o SE t//EW RS 2 a,. 2 Lu,an 3 0, p2 z F- 42 a 4) � fart do 15 z UJ�;ADM/RAL lY s LLB= G7P'�`; ~ i �93= '' /3 + e W �` E 4�'� 6� go P_Q�. r-- s 01 1 00 �— E S. W. 0 1/ \/O 12 04 1 t 13 � 3 ! 105 -" 9 01 /os 3 .� t4 8 O 02 �z6 05 6 17 /B 19 20 21 5 185tK PL. S. W 22 J 01 — 04 4 3 W G!� 4 (2t�24 23 04 104 Q to 2 1 ■ d / 8 01 ao �� 0 s OZ to ti y Ito SE A V IIEW FIR 5\.?�.».. > 13 I I I I i-------------- I ,2 L-------------'�\ I I I I I i I I s --- ,841h ST. SW. ------------- N"i NOT OPEN 1 1 \ N - \H I D D E I( GLEN n ,2 I I I I I � I l 9 I i I i I I I h --- Ial I 1------- w l#i i s N a, r--------I J W 0 0 D S C R E E K P L A C E .,.sa T R A CT 999 -----------------1 1 A D M I R A L T Y A C R E S 1 j 11 B L O C K 2 � A. (1 I ^1 11 i ( 1 ( ( 1 1 0 1 1 1 ( i i i I I l t III F----------4 rid-- �, � EKCBlAN i i I fit\ ,os Iil <.� — — — — — — — , E D Mj O N O S SEA V I E W (TRACTS I I 5 oow 18 I i9 i 20 ', o> ,ssth —m s.w_ / 22 4 -- ---- I! _. xln Ml HAN Z. PARK -PR0 LEGAL DESCRIPTION - PORTIONS OF 184TH STREET SN&OLYMpIC\ VACATED THAT PORTION OF OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE AND 184TH STREET SW ADJ( 10 BLOCK 1 ADMIRALTY ACRES ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF F VOLUME 12 OF PLATS PAGE 48 RECORDS OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY V� DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING ATTHE NORTHEAST CORNER OFSAID LOT S;THENCE 0] ALONG THE EAST LINE OFSAID LOT BALONG ACURVE TOTHE LEFT | OF813\7OFEET ANARC DISTANCE C`F2O.G3FEET TDAPOINT C}FTAN 8O"5S'2V^EALONG SAID EAST LINE 5V.00FEET TOANANGLE POINT OFSAID OLYMP|CVIEW DRIVE AND THE TRUE POINT OFBEGINNING � DESCRIPTION; ` THENCE ALONG SAID WEST LINE B81o0I4T W 10.00 FEET, 88°59-� o8100740" W1O.0OFEET, S 80 59'20"E175.15FEET TOTHE NORTH i STREET THENCE N890 07'51^W ALONG SAID NORTH LINE 242.66 SOUTHEAST CORNER OFSAID LOT 1V;THENCE 833"04'19^E24.11F LINE C)FSAID STREET; THENCE 8QpD7'51^EALONG SAID SOUTH Lit POINT WHICH BEARS 88p5S'2O^EFROM THE TRUE POINT [>FBEG|Nt N8P5B'2O^VV. PARALLEL WITH SAID OLYMP|CVIEW DRIVE 289.O8FEE POINT OFBEGINNING, mm , CONTINENTAL ENO, Co. 10007 GREENWOOD AVE, N. P.O. BOX 33725 INV = 260.42 % \ A J02'29'10" R=I1613.70' T-4{13.32' 1 L =1126.63' 1 ° 11 1 A D .� — — -- • EAST 212.66 0UJ ° EX.MH 165 U ry�h ° sw`" / �/ , TOP = 263.95r d 0. /� � °� // ° o O ' INV 253.00 0. Ln al wp� cc Ln dr` —26 g 1101 Go rn 1 0 166 O �� .55 285 � a " Uo cn;. 290 EX. HOUSE i y ip� 295 _ Lu 300 w 305 DECK ~ ` O N tL 0, 370 o o t Z yi Lu ur 3 ~O h 320 ° , N�NN..f z z tA �`L°j h b`�"�`� 1 TOP = /, �► , • ; INVEX TOP = h • O s ....yam, HOUSE 1 ; 1 ' NV S 89 7 51 rE .�2.52L98'�263.13' ! 320 Z 325 } �'� , rn c t 330 L1 N m N Ww� Lp W N p U, O i .v ....