Loading...
021779 V-58-78 V-59-78 Curtis Thomson, attorney for the applicant, said the lot size is 50, x 110' and originally was two 30' lots. Ile said the sketch they submitted with their application was in error in that it shows an existing structure on this lot and the lot actually is vacant. He had no rendering to display at -this time, saying the applicant had not done any architectural or engineering work yet. He said the plan.was to build two or three residential units in a duplex or triplex configura- tion. 'He noted there was some question by an adjoining property owner as to height and he said they would.have to comply with Code requirements. He added that parking probably would come in from the alley. he public portion of the hearing was then closed. Mr. Hatzenbuhler commented that a triplex would be in keeping with the surrounding area, and Mrs. Stole noted that he was lacking only a very small portion of land. MR(_ JAMES A. ANDERSON - Variance from required total number of parking spaces at 20822 76th Ave. W. (RML) Mrs. Luster said the applicant was short one parking stall' There are several large evergreen trees on the site that probably would have to be removed if additional parking is required. The problem arose when the applicant decided to move a fire hydrant which was planned for a planted area. There was concern that it might endanger two large trees so the decision was made to move it and in so doing a parking stall was lost. Mrs. Luster indicated that one parking space had been approved by the City although it was not a conventional parking space. On -street parking is provided 200' from the complex which could alleviate any overflow. Mrs. Luster recommended approval. The public portion of the hearing was opened. Don Westlin, architect for the development, said the site has a number of existing trees including some evergreens up to 40'- 50' high. He gave the same general explanation of how the .parking stall was lost, and he said the site had 35 off-street parking stalls. The public portion of the hearing was closed. Mr. Roy felt this sounded like a' reasonable request. He said there is a lot of parking in. that area and. he thought the request was worth granting to save a tree. MR. ROY MOVED, SECONDED BY MR. DETRIMENTAL TO THE THEALLTHI,ESAFETTYZENBUHR, TO F,PAND VWELFARE7OFAWOULDS IT THE -NEIGHBORHOOD. MOTION CARRIED. WALTER C. SELLERS - Variance from required front yard setback at 19212 94th P1. Id. (RS-12) i I 4 I i E The applicant was requesting a 9' variance from the required 25' setback. . He wished to construct a carport attached to a house under construction. The problem arose because of an easement onto his property. An 8''wide access easement extends into the property for a distance of 16'. If the variance were granted the applicant could build a two -car, carport in the most accessible location on the property. The property slopes and it might be difficult to locate a carport elsewhere. An adequate turnaround area would be provided which would eliminate sight problems. Mrs. Luster did not think it would.endanger the safety of others since the section icant's of the house and easement in question is located entirely on theapplicant's that property. She recommended approval. Mr. Roy noted that it appear the proposed carport: was within the lines of the proposed house. The public portion of the hearing was opened. The applicant said the only people who might be concerned were his neighbors, Mr. and Mrs. Sharp, and he had discussed this with them and they seemed to me amenable to the proposal. The public portion of the EDMONDS BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT Page 5 - August 16, 1978 S