Loading...
01977V-59-78 Pal Mrs. Luster read a letter from the ADBin which it encouraged approval of this application as it would be an aid to natural drainage. The gravel would only be used in the parking areas, most of it being under the building. The driveways will be paved. Mrs. Luster said this would eliminate the need for specially designed retention systems and the gravel would fit in well with the landscape plan, softening the effect of the site. She recommended approval, subject to: A drainage plan by a professional engineer, curb cut and sidewalks to City standards, and materials used to be compatible for a parking lot. Mr. Roy commented that he thought the ADB's function was aesthetics and he asked why not allow this for everyone. Mrs. Luster responded that the Engineering Division also had indicated approval and that it had not been indicated by the applicant what the hardship was. She said she assumed there would be a cost hardship, but that could not be a consideration. Mrs. Stole said she liked the proposal if there was a good reason to do it that way. The public portion of the hearing was opened. Ian Miller said he objected to acres of blacktop and concrete and he felt this use would help the drainage system. He felt the appearance would be better and he did not anticipate gravel being carried in any great amount to Bell St. Mr. Johnson of 645 Bell said he adjoined the site on the west side. He did not think crushed rock was good for drainage and did not think this was practical. Mrs. Jack Stewart of 641 Bell St. had been present earlier in the evening and had left a note that she opposed the proposal because she and her husband have dust allergies. The public portion of the hearing was closed. Mrs. Stole said she did not think this proposal necessarily would be dustier.. Mrs. Luster said the applicant would be required to submit a drainage plan prepared by a professional and that would determine whether there would be a drainage problem. Mr. Roy noted that a variance would be permanent.he wasn't assured that this would not be dusty or that it would not be tracked into the street. He said he always felt there had to be a hardship for granting of a variance. Mr. Hatzenbuhler agreed that there were too many things not known about this: Mr. Visser said the level of ground water would be a determining factor. Mr. Roy added that the crushed rock may erode into the storm system.;fF,sit 1t1�X1INCs N�;uMYI(1tIUNw;l±�iil i�. As to findings as to why this would not 56--"L, a proper variance, Mr. Roy said he did not see that there was a hardship, if it drained into a retention system it probably would have to be cleaned out because gravel moves, and he did not know enough about such use to approve it. Mr. Visser added that this question should be determined by the engineers and should not come before this Board. Mrs. Luster suggested continuing this item and having the applicant submit a drainage plan indicating the tvoe of soil on which the caravel would be used. MR. ROY WALTER C SELLERS - Continued from earlier in the meeting. City Attorney Wayne Tanaka explained that "yard" extends across the entire width of the property. He said the applicant only needed a EDMONDS BOARD Of ADJUSTMENT Page 7 - August 16, 1976