Loading...
HE Decision.pdfC TFY OF EDMONDS 121 5TH AVENUE NORTH ® Edmonds, WA 98020 - (425) 771-0220 - FAX (425) 771-0221 HEARING EXAMINER C, J S9 In the Matter of the Application of Sound Transit For a Conditional Use Permit and Consolidated Design Review NO. CU -08-065 AD13-08-01s. FAJ�, 9 GARY HAAKENSON MAYOR SUMMARY OF DECISION The request for a conditional use permit (CUP) and consolidated design review to allow development of a temporary commercial parking lot in the Community Business zone at 102 Main Street in Edmonds is GRANTED, subject to conditions. " I 1 0 1] Adil RAIA112111XV " 1"I Request: Sound Transit (Applicant) requested a CUP and consolidated design review to allow development of a temporary commercial parking lot at 102 Main Street in Edmonds. Hearing Date: The City of Edmonds Hearing Examiner conducted an open record hearing on the request on March 19, 2009, after conducting a site visit. Testimony: At the open record hearing, the following individuals presented testimony under oath: 1. Gina Coccia, Planner, City of Edmonds 2. Paul Cornish, Applicant Representative 3. Robert Gregg, owner of subject property 4. Ken Kime, Diamond Parking, representative of current site tenant Exhibits: The following exhibits were admitted hi the record: Planning Division Staff Report, dated March 10, 2009, with the following attachments: 1. IWIITMT%M-� 1. Zoning and vicinity map 2. Land use application 3. Applicant's criteria statement and proposed work schedule Findings, Conclusions, and Decision City of Edmonds Hearing Examiner Sound Transit Temp. Parking Lot, No. CU-08-65ISDB-08-66 page I of 10 lncokporo�ed Ai-v,P,ist 11, 1890 4. Subsequent Applicant's submittal with attachments: a. Parking layout map b. Drainage plan c. Parcel map d. Signage example e. Sign sample language f Streetlight and catch basin plan g. City Engineering memorandum, with attached gravel/pavement location plan S. SEPA EIS Addendum 6. Lease agreement 7. Photos of the site (taken by Applicant) 8. Public notices (to date) B. ADB Draft Meeting Minutes C. Notices and Affidavits of Public Hearing 2. Staff PowerPoint presentation Memorandum from Jeanie McConnell, City Engineering Program Manager, dated March 24, 2009' Upon consideration of the testimony and exhibits admitted in the record, the Hearing Examiner enters the following findings and conclusions. FINDINGS I The Applicant requested a requested a CUP and. consolidated design review to allow development of a temporary commercial parking lot in the Community Business zone at 102 Main Street in Edmonds.' Exhibit 1, page 1; Exhibit I.A. 2, Application. 2. The 0.37 -acre subject property is located at the prominent downtown intersection of Main Street and Sunset Avenue (State Route 104), adjacent to the Amtrak and freight railroad line and near the Edmonds ferry dock. Surrounding development includes a mix of retail and office uses, including several restaurants. Currently the site contains the vacant Skippers restaurant building and a commercial parking lot operated by Diamond Parking 1 On the record at hearing, the Examiner determined additional comment was needed from Engineering to address the Staff recommendation to approve the permit for longer than the one-year period contemplated in the code governing temporary parking lots. The record was held open until March 26, 2009 for Engineering comments, which were timely submitted and are admitted as Exhibit 3. The record was held open until April 2, 2009 for responsive comments, if any, from the Applicant. None were submitted. The record closed on April 2, 2009. 2 The subject property is known as Tax Parcel Number 00-4548-003-007-00. Exhibit], Attachment A, page 2. Findings, Conclusions, and Decision City of Edmonds Hearing Examiner Sound Transit Temp. Parking Lot, No. CU-08,65ISDB-08-66 page 2 of 10 (CU -07-97), approved March 20, 2008. 3 Exhibit 1. page 1; Testimony of Ms. Coccia; Exhibit 1, Attachment A, pages 2-3; Site Visit. 3. The site is flat. There is some existing landscaping within the site, as well as some landscaping within the adjacent City right-of-way along Main Street and the rounded comer onto Sunset Avenue. Exhibit 1, AttachmentA.4a. A critical areas reconnaissance report indicated that the site contains a seismic hazard area; however, no structures are proposed with the application and therefore no further studies are required for the proposed use relating to geologic hazards. The property is not within shoreline jurisdiction of any water of statewide significance. Exhibit 1, Attachment A, page 3. 4. The application was submitted on October 30, 2008 and deemed complete on the same day. Exhibit], Attachment A.8. The proposal includes removal of the existing restaurant building and development of approximately 25 additional parking stalls (for a total of 50 spaces) within the site for Sound Transit commuter parking during construction of the Edmonds Commuter Rail Station. After demolition of the vacant commercial structure, the Applicant proposes to finish the exposed surface to the grade of the existing paved parking lot (as necessary) and install a gravel surface in the footprint of the removed structure and associated building pad. No new structures are proposed. The existing paved portion of the site would not be altered. Parking stalls would be defined by striping and wheel stops in both the gravel and paved portions of the site. One-way ingress, egress, and internal circulation would be established consistent with City requirements. Exhibit 1, pages I- 2; Testimony of Mr. Cornish; Exhibit 1, Attachment A; Exhibit 1, Attachments A. 3 and A. 4. 6. The project would have minimal impact on views from surrounding properties. The existing vacant building would be removed and existing landscaping would be enhanced, improving the view of the site itself. The current parking use would be doubled in area, but no structures would be added. The temporary parking use is proposed to last only during construction of the Edmonds Commuter Rail Station, between 16 and 24 months from date of CUP issuance. Exhibit 1, pages 1-2; Testimony ofMr. Cornish; Exhibit 1, Attachment A; Exhibit 1, Attachments A.3 and A.4. 7. Temporary parking lots are allowed by CUP approval in all commercial zones. Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) 17.50.090. Because no new structures are proposed, zoning code setback, floor area, and height calculations are not required. The exact number and layout of parking stalls would be determined during civil engineering review after preliminary approval., Exhibit 1, Attachment A, page 5; Testimony of Ms. Coccia. 3 CU -07-97 was approved March 20, 2008 for one year and no extension had been filed as of the time of public hearing. See CU -07-97; Testimony of Mr. Dime. Findings, Conclusions, and Decision City of Edmonds Hearing Examiner Sound Transit Temp. Parking Lot, No. CU-08-65ISDB-08-66 page 3 of 10 I 8. The proposal's design elements were considered at a public meeting of the architectural design board (ADB) on March 4, 2009. Of the 14 site design objectives contemplated in the Comprehensive Plan, Staff identified the following as applicable to the proposed temporary use: vehicular access; location and layout of parking; pedestrian connections off-site; weather protection; lighting; signage; utilities, trash, and mechanical; significant features; and landscape buffers. Exhibit 1, Attachment A, page 4; Tetimony of Us. Caccia. 9. Vehicles access the site from Railroad Street to the west and Sunset Avenue to the east. The existing driveway approaches are paved and would not be altered. The site contains an existing pedestrian path connection between the sidewalk and the area surrounding the vacant restaurant building. Both Sunset Avenue and Main Street are developed with existing sidewalks. Exhibit 1, Attachment A, page 4; Attachment A. 4; Attachment A. 4. a. 10. The site contains approximately 25 parking stalls currently. Demolition of the structure and site preparation would make room for approximately 25 more. The project is intended to prevent interruptions in available commercial parking during construction of the Edmonds Commuter Rail Station. Exhibit], Attachment A, page 4,-AtiachmentA.4; Testimony of Ms. Coccia. 11. No structures are proposed and no pay stations would be installed. Users of the temporary parking lot would park vehicles and walk to the train station to wait for trains. No weather protection is proposed. No new utilities would be needed for the temporary parking use. Exhibit 1, Attachment A, page 4, Attachment A. 4. 12. There are three existing streetlights near the site: one along the south property line; one near the northeast corner of the site; and one across Sunset A -venue to the east. The site is 133 feet wide at its widest point. No additional street lighting is proposed. Exhibit 1, Attachment A, page 4; Attachment A. 4. Staff stated that the existing lighting appears to be sufficient. Exhibit 1, Attachment B, page 6,- Testimony of Ms. Coccia. 13. The Applicant submitted a photograph of a typical sign at another of their parking facilities, as well as sample sign language. No application for sign permit has been submitted. Sign permits are required. Information on the Applicant's typical parking lot signs includes guidelines on dissuading break ins and a list of prohibited activities, which include (but are not limited to): camping in vehicle; dumping; litter; leafleting and unauthorized sales or advertising; panhandling; skateboarding and rollerblading; vehicle - for -sale activity; storing disabled vehicles; auto repair; RV and trailer parking; and leaving vehicles unattended for 24 hours or more. Exhibit 1, Attachment A, page 4, Attachments 4d and 4e. 14. The site currently contains some landscaping, including: a mature hedge along the southern property line; some shrubs and low plantings around the existing building within the proposed development envelope; and shrubs and low plantings within the City right- of-way adjacent to the proposed development envelope. Of the existing landscaping, only that within the proposed development envelope would be removed; the mature Findings, Conclusions, and Decision City of Edmonds Hearing Examiner Sound Transit Temp. Parking Lot, No. CU-08-65ISDB-08-66 page 4 of 10 hedge at the south lot line and all plantings within the right-of-way would be retained. The Applicant proposed no additional landscaping. Exhibit 1, Attachment A, page 5; Attachment A. 4; Attachment A. 4. a, "Conceptual Parking Layout". 15. Pursuant to ECDC 20.13.030.E, parking areas with up to 50 stalls are required to provide 17.5 square feet of landscaped area per parking stall. "Type W landscaping is intended to provide visual relief and shade in parking areas. Type V landscaping requires trees, minimum planting bed sizes, and beds at the end of each parking row, among other requirements. ECDC 20.13.030.E and E.2. However, given the temporary duration of the proposed parking use, Staff suggested that requiring fall compliance with landscaping standards would be unduly burdensome. Staff noted that the project as proposed without landscaping would enhance the existing visual site conditions. As a compromise, Staff recommended to the Architectural Design Board that the Applicant be required only to retain the hedge to the south and to clean up and add low ground cover -type plantings to the existing landscaping that would be retained in the City right-of-way. Staff opined that such "sprucing up" of existing beds would beautify the site and make "the transition from sidewalk to gravel lot more attractive". In order to achieve the desired landscaping enhancements, Staff recommended a condition of approval requiring submission of a revised site plan depicting additional plantings. Exhibit 1, Attachment A, page 6, - .Testimony ofMs. Coccia, 16. After completing analysis of design review requirements applicable to the project, Staff recommended that the ADB recommend design review approval to the Hearing Examiner. Exhibit 1, Attachment A, page 6, Testimony of Ms. Coccia. 17. One ADB member expressed a concern that the gravel parking surface be maintained to avoid potholes and to avoid the tracking of gravel into public rights-of-way. Otherwise, the ADB discussion focused almost solely on the question of whether and to what extent to require landscaping improvements for the proposed temporary use. In sum, the Board agreed that existing site conditions constitute an eyesore; however, several members hesitated to single out the Applicant with the responsibility of enhancing the visual values of the gateway to the City, given the fact that the City has not maintained the landscaping within the right-of-way in question. The Board reached a compromise based on the premise of a temporary use to last no longer than 24 months. The ADB recommended design review approval subject to conditions requiring the Applicant to: include low native plantings in the adjacent landscape beds within the right-of-way; retain and "clean up" the existing shrubs within the right-of-way; and regularly maintain the landscaped areas on and adjacent to the site. Exhibit 1, Attachment B. 18. The Comprehensive Plan designation for the subject property is "Downtown Master Plan", and the site is within the "Downtown Waterfront Activity Center'. City Planning Staff identified the following Comprehensive Plan goals of commercial development as applicable to the current proposal: Findings, Conclusions, and Decision Cily of Edmonds Hearing Examiner Sound Transit Temp- Parking Lot No. CU-08-65ISDB-08-66 page 5 of] 0 E.10 Provide a more efficient transportation system featuring improved bus service, pedestrian and bicycle routes, and adequate streets and parking areas. E.16 Provide for the gradual elimination of large and inadequately landscaped paved areas. 2006 Comprehensive Plan, page 34 19. The site would eventually be redeveloped, and with permanent development, full landscaping would be required. Members, of the ADB opined that it is "difficult" to require the Applicant to plant trees for a temporary use. Exhibit 1, Attachment A, page 3; Testimony of Ms. Coccia; Exhibit 1, Attachment B, page 6. 20. The Applicant maintains contracts with vendors and retains employees, who together maintain its other parking lots on a regular basis, including but not limited to: initial striping; maintenance of striping and parking surfaces; litter control; and landscaping maintenance. The Sound Transit Facilities Department has already incorporated maintenance of the instant proposed temporary lot into its budget. If approved, an on-call vendor would be charged with maintaining the striping in good condition. Exhibit 1, Attachment B, page 6; Testimony of 'Mr. Cornish. 21. Temporary parking lots are limited to a one-year approval, with a possible one-year extension to be administratively reviewed and decided based on submission. of a "written application stating the reasons" for the extension request prior to expiration of the additional permit. ECDC I 7.50.090A. 1. Because the Applicant's tentative project schedule ranges up to 24 months (at a projected maximum) and because the one-year extension can be administratively approved if a written request is filed, with no other criteria, Staff recommended that the Examiner approve the proposed temporary parking lot for two years initially. Although temporary parking lots may be operated up to a maximum of four years by code [see ECDC 17.50.090.A.21, based on ADB concerns about the longer term impacts of the reduced landscaping requirements, Staff recommended that the temporary parking lot be limited to a maximum of two years. If longer temporary parking became necessary, the Applicant would be required to file a new application for temporary parking lot, at which point the use would be reviewed for compliance with ftdI landscaping requirements, including trees. Exhibit 1, pages 3-4, Testimony of Ms Caccia; Exhibit 1, Attachment B, page 6. 22. In its current condition, site runoff sheet flows to an existing catch basin located in the southwestern quarter of the site. Pursuant to ECDC 18.95.020, parking lots are required to have hard surfaces; however, the City Engineer may allow temporary parking lots to have gravel surfacing. Driveways for gravel parking lots are required to have 20 -foot paved aprons. Upon review of a conceptual parking layout and the Staff recommendation to approve the CUP for two years, the City Engineer noted that such would be acceptable on the following conditions: that the gravel area be sloped to direct runoff to the catch basin near the driveway approach at Railroad Street; that an oil/water separator or other Findings, Conclusions, and Decision City of Edmonds Hearing Examiner Sound Transit Temp. Parking Lot, No. CU-08-65ISDB-08-66 page 6 of 10 City -approved filtering method be installed in the existing catch basin; and that the Applicant provide a inspection and maintenance plan. for the oil/water separator or other filter, to be reviewed and accepted by Engineering prior to construction. Exhibit 3, 23. The Applicant did not object to the additional ground cover in the existing landscape beds in the right-of-way and in gaps that might remain after removal of the building. The Applicant would retain the shrubs and maintain all landscaping through employees or contract vendors. Exhibit 1, Attachment B, page 6; Testimony of Mr. Cornish. 24. The City's Technical Committee, comprised of the Engineering Division and the Fire, Parks and Recreation, and Public Works Departments, reviewed the proposal. The Engineering Division had initial questions, which were resolved through communication subsequent to the Applicant's first submittal. Exhibit 1, page 2; Exhibit 1, Attachment 4.g; Testimony of Ms. Coccia. 25. The Sound Transit Edmonds Commuter Rail Station was reviewed for compliance with the requirements of the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) as part of the Everett, to Seattle Commuter Rail Project. An environmental impact statement (EIS) was issued in December 1999. With the instant request, the Applicant submitted an addendum EIS addressing the role of the instant proposal in the overall scope of the greater project. The proposed temporary parking lot would not substantially change the project's previously reviewed impacts or require additional analysis of alternatives to those contemplated in existing environmental documents, and no new probable significant environmental impacts would result. The requirements of SEPA have been addressed. Exhibit 1, Attachment A, page 2; Exhibit 1, Attachment A. ,Testimony ofMs Caccia. 26. Notice of public hearing was published, posted, and mailed on March 5, 2009. No public comments were received. Exhibit 1, page 2; Exhibit 1, Attachment A.8, Testimony of Ms. Coccia, 27. An agent for the company currently operating the commercial parking lot on-site attended the hearing, as did the owner of the subject property. According to the owner's testimony, the current parking lot operator .had inadvertently been excluded from communications regarding the current proposal. In public comment, the owner supported the instant application, and the current tenant did not oppose it. Testimony of Mr. Gregg; Testimony of Mr. Kime. 28. Staff recommended that approval, as conditioned, be allowed to transfer to subsequent parties, in the event that the Applicant's need for the project ends prior to the 24 -month recommended expiration date. Exhibit 1, page 6; Testimony of Ms. Coccia. Jurisdiction: The Hearing Examiner has jurisdiction to hear and decide CUP requests pursuant to ECDC 20.100.010.A.3 and 20.05.010. Design Review approval maybe consolidated with other land use permits heard and decided by the Examiner pursuant to ECDC 20.90.010(B)(2). Findings, Conclusions, and Decision City of Edmonds Hearing Examiner Sound Transit Temp. Parking Lot, No. CU-08-65ISDB-08-66 page 7 of t0 Criteria for Review: Pursuant to ECDC 20.05.010, the Hearing Examiner may not approve a CUP unless the following findings can be made: A. That the proposed use is consistent with the comprehensive plan; B. Zoning Ordinance. That the proposed use, and its location, is consistent with the purposes of the zoning ordinance and the purposes of the zoning district in which the use is to be located, and that the proposed use will meet all applicable requirements of the zoning ordinance; C. Not Detrimental. That the use, as approved or conditionally approved, will not be significantly detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare, and to nearby private property or improvements unless the use is a public necessity; and D. Transferability. The hearing examiner shall determine whether the conditional use permit shall run with the land or shall be personal. Conclusions Based on Findings: 1 As conditioned, the proposed temporary parking lot would be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Removal of the vacant building and clean up and maintenance of existing landscaping, as well as the additional plantings required by conditions, would enhance the streetscape. Approval would contribute to prevention of parking congestion and the concomitant traffic and pedestrian safety issues during construction of the Edmonds Commuter Rail Station. Findings Nos. 5, 6, 14, 1-5, 18, 19, 20, and 23. 2. Temporary parking lots are allowed in the Community Business zone. No structures are proposed, rendering setback, height, and floor area calculations moot. Conditions of approval would address landscaping requirements appropriate to the temporary parking use. Findings Nos. 7 and 17. 3. With conditions, the temporary parking lot would not result in any detriment to the public health, safety, and welfare. The project would not increase vehicle or pedestrian traffic in the downtown area and would prevent parking congestion during construction of the commuter rail station. No new structures, including pay stations, are proposed. The existing abandoned commercial building would be removed. Existing mature, healthy landscaping along the south lot line and within the City right-of-way would be maintained and, with conditions, expanded through new low, native plantings. Existing drainage conditions would not be interrupted; as conditioned, the new gravel surface would be graded to slope towards the existing catch basin and oil/water separation or similar filtration treatment would be installed. Views from surrounding properties would not be adversely impacted, while views of the site from surrounding properties would be (somewhat) improved. With conditions, the temporary parking use would not exceed two years in duration without undergoing additional review, at which time further landscaping Findings, Conclusions, and Decision City of Edmonds Hearing Examiner Sound Transit Temp. Parking Lot No. CU-08-65ISDB-08-66 page 8 of 10 requirements would apply. The Technical Committee reviewed the project and submitted no adverse comments. The proposal was reviewed for compliance with the requirements of SEP.A. Findings Nos. 2, 3, 5, 6, 11, 14, 15, 17, 20, 21, 22, 24, and .25. 4. The requirement for the Applicant to submit a request for a one-year extension is waved and the proposed temporary use is allowed for a maximum of 24 months. With a condition limiting the duration of the use to a maximum of two years, the CUP would be transferable to subsequent parking lot operators within the 24 months of approval. Regardless of operator, any extension beyond the initial two-year approval would require review of a new application. Findings Nos. 21 and 28. S. Applicable design -review -requirements are enumerated in Finding number 8. The ADB's recommendation for design review approval is adopted. As conditioned, appropriate provisions have been made for vehicular access, parking layout, pedestrian connections, weather protection, lighting, signage, utilities, trash, and landscaped buffers. Conditions would require submission and approval of a revised site plan including additional landscaping, ongoing site maintenance of parking lot surface and landscaping, as well as all appropriate permits, including but not limited to grading, building, and demolition. Findings Nos. 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, and 17. DECISION Based on the preceding findings and conclusions, the requested CUP and consolidated design review approval to allow development of a temporary commercial parking lot in the Community Business zone at 102 Main Street in. Edmonds is GRANTED, subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to issuance of any construction -related permits, the Applicant shall submit a revised site plan for review and approval by the City Planning Division. The revised site plan shall depict the addition of low native plantings (groundcover) within the existing planting beds to be retained within the right -of way and in gaps around the -removed structure. All landscaping shall be installed prior to commencement of parking lot operations. 2. The shrub -type landscaping existing within the adjacent right-of-way and the hedge along the south lot line shall be retained. All new and retained landscaping within the site and the adjacent right-of-way shall be regularly maintained in a neat, healthy condition for the duration of the temporary parking use. 3. The Applicant shall maintain on-site parking spaces and the parking surface in a safe, litter -free manner, with parking spaces that conform to all City development standards, and shall not allow gravel to be tracked into the public right-of-way for the fife of the temporary parking use. 4. Prior to commencement of operations, the new gravel surface shall be graded to direct runoff to the catch basin near the driveway approach at Railroad Street and an oil/water separator or other City -approved filtering method shall be installed in the existing catch Findings, Conclusions, and Decision City of dmonds Hearing Examiner Sound.Transit .Iemp. Parking Lot, No. CU-08-65ISDB-08-66 page 9 of 10 basin. The Applicant shall provide an inspection and maintenance plan for the oil/water separator or other filter, to be reviewed and accepted by Engineering prior to construction, S. Approval of the temporary parking use, as conditioned herein, is granted for a maximum period of two years. Any extension shall require review of new applications for conditional use and design review. 6. Approval may transfer to subsequent operators of temporary parking uses within the authorized 24 -month period. DECIDED this 15"' day of April 2009. Toweill Rice Taylor LLC City of Edmonds Hearing Examiners By: Sharon A. Rice Findings, Conclusions, and Decision City of Edmonds Hearing Examiner Sound Transit Temp. Parking Lot, .No. CU-08-65/SD 3-08-66 page :10 of 10 The following is a summary of the deadlines and procedures for filing requests for reconsideration and appeals. Any person wishing to file or respond to a request for reconsideration or an appeal should contact the Planning Division of the Development Services Department for further procedural information. REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION Section 20.100.010(G) of the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) requires the Hearing Examiner to reconsider his or her 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. "PEALS Chapter 20.105 of the ECDC contains the appeal procedures for Hearing Examiner decisions. Pursuant to Section 20.105.040(A), persons entitled to appeal include (1) the Applicant; (2) anyone who has submitted a written document to the City of Edmonds concerning the application prior to or at the hearing; or (3) anyone testifying on the application at the hearing. Sections 20.105.020(A) requires appeals to be in writing, and state (1) the decision being appealed, the name of the project applicant, and the date of the decision; (2) the name and address of the person (or group) appealing the decision, and his or her interest in the matter; and (3) the reasons why the person appealing believes the decision to be wrong. Pursuant to Section 20.105.020(8), the appeal must be filed with the Director of the Development Services Department within 14 calendar days after the date of the decision being appealed. The appeal must be accompanied by any required appeal fee. TIME LIMITS FOR RECONSIDERATION AND APPEAL The time limits for Reconsideration and Appeal run concurrently. If a request for reconsideration is filed before the time limit for filing an appeal has expired, the time clock for filing an appeal is stopped until a decision on the reconsideration request is completed. Once the Hearing Examiner has issued his or her decision on the reconsideration request, the time clock for filing an appeal continues from the point it was stopped. For example, if a reconsideration request is filed on day five of the appeal period, an individual would have nine more days in which to file an appeal after the Hearing Examiner issues his decision on the reconsideration request. Section 20.05.020(0) of the ECDC states: "Time Limit. Unless the owner obtains a building permit, or if no building permit 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." 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. incoyporated Auqust 11, 1890 'I C. I S9 Applicant CITY OF' EDMONDS 121 5TH AVENUE NORTH ® Edmonds, WA 98020 - (425) 771-0220 - FAX (425) 771-0221 HEARING EXAMINER Sound Transit For a Conditional Use Permit and Design Review Approval jlll l ill 1, Sharon A. Rice, the undersigned, do hereby declare: Case Nos. CU-08-65/ADB-08-66 GARY HAAKENSON MAYOR I That I am a partner in the firm of Toweill Rice Taylor LLC, which maintains a professional services agreement with the City of Edmonds, Washington for the provision of Hearing Examiner services, and make this declaration in that capacity; 2. That I am now and at all times herein mentioned have been a citizen of the United States, a resident of the State of Washington, over the age of eighteen (18), and competent to be a witness and make service herein; 3. On April 14, 20091 served a copy of the decision in case CU-08-65/ADB-08-66 upon the following individuals at the addresses below by first class US Mail. Don Vogt, Sound Transit Robert Gregg/Splash Properties 401 S. Jackson Street 51 W. Dayton, #304 Seattle, WA 98104-2826 Edmonds, WA 98020 Clerk of the Edmonds City Council 121 Fifth Avenue North, First Floor Edmonds, WA 98020 City of Edmonds Planning Division 121 Fifth Avenue North, First Floor Edmonds, WA 98020 City of Edmonds Engineering 121 Fifth Avenue North, First Floor Edmonds, WA 98020 Paul Cornish, Sound Transit Proj. Mngr. 2632 NW 64h Street Seattle, WA 98107 Art Eash, HDR Engineering 500 — 108t" Ave. NE, Ste. 1200 Bellevue, WA 98004-5549 City of Edmonds Fire Department, C/O 121 Fifth Avenue North, First Floor Edmonds, WA 98020 I hereby declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that the foregoing is true and correct: DATED THIS 10 day of April 2009 at Shoreline, ashington. D Sharon A. Rice, Toweill Rice Taylor LLC Serving as Hearing Examiner for Edmonds, Washington IncorporatedAuIgust 11, 1,890 "1