Loading...
PLN199000004-5629K.A.STEVENSON icmm CONSTRUCTION BUILDING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT HF-CEIVlED ° JUN 1 19,91 Gi 'Orr PLAiVHU G DEPT. ,.L ref,,, $ `ad ✓ K�s� -ors I'e2,o►':G B"1 LK �ope G( ex/?51o Ot �� KEN STEVENSON (206) 6 7 2 - 6 9 7 7 Ms. Gordon said she was unsure of the Council's intent at the first presentation but was now clear of their intent. Ms. Gordon requested an extension from June 1 to July 10, 1991. COUNCILMEMBER DWYER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER KASPER, TO APPROVE ITEM (J) WITH AN AMEND- MENT TO THE CONTRACT ON PAGE 2, PARAGRAPH 2, FROM JUNE 1, 1991 TO JULY 10, 1991. MOTION CARRIED. Mr. Snyder noted that paragraph 4 of the contract would also reflect a change in the June 1 date to July 10, 1991. HEARING ON PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDATION REGARDING PROPOSED REZONE OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT ND683 -16. AND 176TH .W. .M - - --0 L . S.W. Current Planning Supervisor Jeff Wilson reported that on December 12, 1990, the Planning Board held a hearing on the request of Kenneth Stevenson to rezone property located at Olympic View Drive and 176th St. S.W. from RS-12 to RS-8. The Board voted unanimously to approve the rezone, subject to additional review of the original SEPA determination by Staff. On February 5, 1990, Mr. Wilson said the City issued a supplemental Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance (MDNS) with revised conditions that: 1) the applicant dedicate 10 feet of right- of-way along 176th St. S.W., and 2) all access to the properties come off of 176th St. S.W., with no access off of Olympic View Drive. Mr. Wilson noted that a copy of the Planning Board recommendation, the minutes from the Planning Board meeting, the supplemental MDNS, quite claim deed, and a vicinity map were included in the Council packets. Councilmember Palmer referred to page 2 of the Planning Board minutes in which former Planning Division Manager Mary Lou Block noted that the slopes on the property in question were over 15% in some areas and, as a result, the property would fall under the regulations for a landslide hazard area. Councilmember Palmer said one of his concerns was that the lot coverage could be squeezed into a smaller envelope because part of a lot may not be developable due to the slope. He inquired if Staff examined that issue and was comfortable with that use. Community Services Director Peter Hahn said review of a geotechnical engineer will be necessary to certify that the property can be developed in the manner proposed. Councilmember Palmer was concerned that the rezone, if granted, not be the impetus for a series of variance requests. City Attorney Scott Snyder noted that the proposed rezone would be presented to the Council again as a subdivision process, which requires that all lots be buildable. Councilmember Kasper inquired if the City was capable of limiting .the number of lots that can be developed on that site. Mr. Snyder said in one sense, the City is not limiting the development on a contract rezone but in another sense, the developer must go through the subdivision or PRO process and satisfy the City that the lots are buildable and, in turn, satisfy the Building Official through the building permit process. Councilmember Dwyer was concerned that the parcel could be developed through the PRO process, forcing the homes closer together because of the sloped area, which could be designated as common area. Mr. Snyder said the Council could proceed in one of two ways: 1) deny the request and indicate that the Council would be considerate of a contract rezone after Councilmember Dwyer's concern had been reviewed through the SEPA process, or 2) approve the rezone with the reservation as to how many residences and/or lot would be placed on the project through the subdivision or PRO process. Councilmember Kasper inquired if the developer could commit to develop not more than three lots. Mr. Snyder said he could commit an offer of contract rezone, but Mr. Snyder pointed out that that issue has not been reviewed by the Planning Board. Kenneth Stevenson, 18403 - 72nd Ave. W., said there will not be enough square footage to develop four lots because of the ten foot dedication along 176th. Mr. Stevenson submitted a drawing to the City Clerk (marked Exhibit 1) for distribution to the Council of a three -lot development that is proposed. Mr. Stevenson noted that there is very little area that is over a 15% slope. Mayor Naughten opened the public portion of the hearing. No input was offered. Mayor Naughten closed the public portion of the hearing. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 9 MARCH 5, 1991 COUNCILMEMBER DWYER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER KASPER, TO ADOPT THE PLANNING BOARD'S RECOM- MENDATION AND DIRECT THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE THE NECESSARY ORDINANCE INCORPORATING THE COUN- CIL'S CONCERNS. Councilmember Palmer inquired if the motion included the requirements of the supplemental MDNS. Mr. Wilson replied affirmatively. MOTION CARRIED. REVIEW OF PUBLIC WORKS FUNDING ALLOCATION Community Services Director Peter Hahn reported that when the City began acquiring land for the Public Works Facility, the Council split the cost equally between the General Fund and the Com- bined Utility (Water/Sewer). Several Councilmembers requested that Staff prepare a comprehensive analysis of the actual cost allocation. Since that time, Mr. Hahn said Staff has begun quantify- ing how the actual facility will be used and to which funds those uses would be allocated. By necessity, he said the analysis is only preliminary and cannot be finalized until after design and construction are completed. Mr. Hahn said the analysis revealed that the General Fund allocation will be significantly re- duced from 50% to approximately 21%, which means that the General Fund has "overpaid" for the property acquisition and will be reimbursed from other funds. Mr. Hahn recommended that the Council formally acknowledge the methodology and intent of the financing plan as suggested the following wording for a motion: "The final total costs of the Public Works Operations Facility, including, but not limited to, land acquisition, design, site work, off -site improvements, and construction, will be allocated on the basis of a model which includes at least three elements: 1) actual amount of space use of the facility by each relevant element of the Public Works Division; 2) the actual costs of the spaces occupied by these uses; and 3) funding of each use by the three major City funds (General Fund, Street Fund, and Combined Utility Fund). Furthermore, while it is recognized that such cost accounting cannot be implement- ed until after the facility is constructed and paid for, the City may elect to temporarily fund project costs from any of the funds. Councilmember Hertrich inquired if the allocation of funding would differ if a fire station were constructed on the site. Mr. Hahn replied affirmatively. Councilmember Hertrich inquired if allocation of the funds is based on 100% use of the property. Mr. Hahn said even the unused portions of the property (i.e., buffering) will be identified for a particular use. Councilmember Wilson said the Street fund is also a fragile fund and many street improvements are not being accomplished. He inquired why the Combined Utility Fund could not be used. He said the City cannot afford to rob the Street Fund. Mr. Hahn said that issue was a legal issue and should be addressed by the City Attorney if the Council opted to use the Combined Utility Fund. He noted that not all of the money from the Metro revenues, which will total $10,000,000 at the end of the decade, has to be kept in the Combined Utility FUND. Mr. Hahn said it is the recommendation of Staff to authorize a motion of intent along the lines recommended above. COUNCILMEMBER DWYER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER KASPER FOR DISCUSSION, TO PASS A MOTION OF INTENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RECOMMENDED ACTION AND DIRECT STAFF TO PROVIDE THE COUNCIL WITH A RESOLUTION CONSISTENT WITH THE WORDING SUGGESTED BY STAFF IN THE AFOREMENTIONED PARAGRAPH. Councilmember Kasper inquired if monies would no longer be allocated from the General Fund. Mr. Hahn replied negatively. He said final allocation of costs will be known only upon completion of the project. MOTION CARRIED WITH COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST OPPOSED. REVIEW OF DEVELOPMENT FEES Community Services Director Peter Hahn noted that the Community Services Department collects a number of fees related to the processing of various permits and actions related to development, i.e., building permit fees, zoning and planning fees, and public works or engineering fees. Mr. Hahn said building permit fees have been addressed by the Council through the adoption in 1987 of a 100% direct cost recovery ordinance. He said no change is recommended in these fees. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 10 MARCH 5, 1991 EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL ° AGENDA MEMO Item number: Oriqinator: Planning Division For Action: X For Information: SUBJECT: HEARING ON PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDATION REGARDING PROPOSED REZONE OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE AND 176TH ST. S.W. (ADDRESS: 17510 OLYMPIC VIEW DR., 6815 176th ST. S.W., AND 6831 176TH ST. S.W.) FROM RS-12 TO RS-8 (FILE R-4-90/APPLICANT: KENNETH STEVENSON) AGENDA TIME: 20 minutes AGENDA DATE: March 5, 1991 EXHIBITS ATTACHED: 1. Planning Board Recommendation 2. Planning Board Minutes 12/12/90 3. Vicinity Map 4. Supplemental MDNS 5. Quit Claim Deed Clearances: Dept./Indiv./Initials ADMIN SVCS/FINANCE CITY ATTORNEY CITY CLERK COMMUNITY SERVICES ENGINEERING PARKS & RECREATION PLANNING PUBLIC WORKS FIRE. PERSONNEL POLICE COMMITTEE MAYOR COMMENTS: EXPENDITURE AMOUNT APPROPRIATION REQUIRED: $0 BUDGETED: $0 REQUIRED: $0 HISTORY AND SUMMARY STATEMENT: On December 12, 1990, the Planning Board held a hearing on the request of Kenneth Stevenson to rezone property located at Olympic View Drive and 176th St. S.W. from RS-12 to RS-8. The Board voted unanimously to approve the rezone, subject to additional review of the original SEPA determination by staff. On February 5, 1990, the City issued a Supplemental Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance (MDNS) with revised conditions that: 1) the applicant dedicate 10 feet of right-of-way along 176th St. S.W., and 2) all access to the properties come off of 176th St. S.W., with no access off of Olympic View Dr. Attached is a copy of the Planning Board recommendation, the minutes from the Planning Board meeting, the Supplemental Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance, Quit Claim Deed, and a vicinity map. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt the Planning Board's recommendation and direct the City Attorney to prepare the necessary ordinance. R490/COUNCIL EXHIBIT 1 FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW CITY OF EDMONDS REZONE CITY OF EDMONDS FILE: 4#R-4-90 After notification in conformance with law, the Planning Board of the City of Edmonds conducted a public hearing on December 12, 1990 on a rezone application submitted by Kenneth A. Stevenson. The applicant has requested approval of a proposal to change the zoning on his property and two other properties located to the west of his property. from RS-12, Single Family Residential 12,000 square foot lots, to RS-8, Single Family Residential 8,000 square foot lots. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The rezone area is located at 17510 Olympic View Drive, 6815 and 6831 176th Street S.W. in the City of Edmonds. 2. Surrounding land uses are residential in nature; zoning to the south is RS-8, to the west is RS-8, to the east in Lynnwood is RR-8400, and to the north is RS-12. The Lynnwood zoning is their closest counterpart to Edmonds RS-8 classification. 3. A mitigated determination of nonsignificance has been issued by the City on the rezone request. The two mitigating conditions are as follows: 1) That the applicants dedicate 10 feet of right of way along 176th Street S. W. for the future construction of road improvements, and 2) That all access to the properties to be rezoned come off of 176th Street S.W., with no access off of / Olympic View Drive. A. The subject property is designated by the Comprehensive Plan Map as Low Density Residential. Both RS-12 and RS-8 classifications are considered Low Density Residential. 5. The applicant is requesting to rezone the subject property from RS-12 to RS-8 to allow for approximately four additional dwelling units at this location. The proposed rezone would be consistent with the existing zoning on three sides of this property and, further, would be consistent with the goals of Washington State's Growth Management Act and the goals of Snohomish County Tomorrow. 6. No opposition to the rezone request was expressed at the public hearing, although one gentleman did express concern about traffic and drainage in Lynnwood. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The Comprehensive Policy Plan Map designates the subject property as Low Density Residential. Both RS-12 and RS-8 zoning are Planning Board ;ommendation age 2 ##R-3-90 consistent with this classification. Surrounding zoning is Primarily RS-8, both in Edmonds and in Lynnwood. 2. A rezone of this property would be consistent with the goals of the State Growth Management Act and also with the Snohomish County Tomorrow Program, which has been adopted by the City of Edmonds. 3. No opposition to the rezone has been expressed by the surrounding residents or property owners. RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL The Planning Board'of the City of Edmonds recommends to the City Council that Rezone Application R-4-90 be approved, with the mitigating conditions which were included in the supplemental Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance. This recommendation was passed unanimously by the Planning Board. PASSED the 12th day of December, 1990. EDMONDS PLANNING R490RES/TXTMLB51 EXH/B/T 2 THESE MINUTES SUBJECT TO JANUARY 9 APPROVAL PLANNING BOARD MINUTES December 12, 1990 The regular meeting of the Edmonds Planning Board was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairperson Bill Allen in the Plaza Meeting Room of the Edmonds Library Building. PRESENT ABSENT STAFF PRESENT Bill Allen, Chair Sharon Claussen Mary Lou Block; Plan. Div. Mgr. Dean Nordquist Karin Noyes, Recorder Mike Cooper Don Stay Hank Lewis Janet Phillips Ms. Claussen was excused from the meeting for business responsibilities. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MR. COOPER MOVED, SECONDED BY MR. STAY, TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 28, 1990 AS SUBMITTED. MOTION CARRIED, WITH MS. PHILLIPS ABSTAINING BECAUSE SHE WAS NOT PRESENT AT THAT MEETING. STAFF AND PLANNING BOARD COMMENTS Ms. Block invited all Board members to attend the City's Employee Christmas Party on December 14 at the Senior Center. Tickets are available to purchase at City Hall. SET DATE FOR PLANNING BOARD RETREAT ;c•y The Board discussed potential dates for the 1991 retreat and decided upon January 12, 1991. The retreat will begin at 9 a.m. at Mr. Stay's home, 715 Sprague. There will be a pot luck lunch and the City will provide chicken. PUBLIC HEARING ON REZONE R-4-90 FROM RS-12 to RS-8 at 17510 Olympic View Drive Ms. Block reviewed the staff report and displayed transparencies to orient the Board and audience to the property being proposed for rezone. She also indicated the topography of the lots. She indicated that the zoning on three sides is RS-8; zoning to the north is RS-12. With a rezone the land would accomodate a total of approximately 11-12 lots, without the rezone approximately 7-8 lots. Mr. Lewis inquired if the declaration of nonsignificance was issued on the entire rezone area or on each lot separately. Ms. Block said it was issued on the area as a whole. Mr. Lewis asked if there were any comments made about the traffic. Ms. Block said there were no comments about the traffic. Ms. Block said the City received a letter from Mr. Thomas Reynolds stating that he is not opposed to the rezone itself. However, he had concerns regarding the drainage and traffic problems which already exist in the area. Ms. Phillips said she is concerned about the traffic impacts. If the City approves the rezone, could they include any stipulations regarding traffic. Ms. Block pointed out that this is not a contract rezone and no conditions can be proposed by the City. Ms. Phillips said she is concerned about the driveways accessing onto Olympic Viax Drive. She fell: this would be dangerous and access to the property should come from 176th. Ms. Block said the applicant has indicated that his discussion with the City Engineer included moving the existing driveway to the west if the property is to be subdivided. Mr. Nordquist inquired if the existing houses on the other two properties will be torn down. Ms. Block explained that there has been no indication that this would happen. She said these two property owners have not expressed any desire to subdivide at this time. Mr. Cooper inquired if there is an application for a subdivision on the applicant's property. Ms. Block said there has not been an application filed for a subdivision. However, she noted it is typical for the applicant to seek the rezone prior to presenting an application and subdivision layout plan. There is a schematic plan for a three lot subdivision which was enclosed in the packets. As clarification, Ms. Block said that since the slopes are over 15 percent on parts of the araliCant's pr..%,- rty, he Would be subject to tHp rp!!,(1atin.,c for landslide hazard arpaq . Chp noted that the majority of areas falling under these regulations are located in RS-12 and RS-20 zones. Kenneth Stevenson, 18403 72nd Avenue West, said he is the owner of the property adjacent to Olympic View Drive, 17510 Olympic View Drive. He said the staff did a thorough review of the property. In reference to the letter from Mr. Reynolds, Mr. Stevenson said he called the City of Lynnwood's Public Works Director and was told that Mr. Reynolds has complained in recent years and the City of Lynnwood has placed culverts and drains all around his property. He also indicated that. the City of Lynnwood cleans the ditches each spring. Mr. Stevenson said that in the years he has lived in the area, he has never seen standing water on 176th. In regard to access, Mr. Stevenson said he talked with the City's Traffic Engineer. The Traffic Engineer indicated that the existing driveway needs to be moved west 10 or 15 feet to obtain the proper sight distance. Mr. Stevenson said Mr. Bagdon and Mr. Davis, the two Participants in the rezone are near retirement and have no plans at this time to subdivide their properties. However, they would like the rezone at this time for inheritance purposes. Mr. Stevenson said that during inclement weather, everyone parks on the fiat areas. He said people park on the front of his property each winter. He said the roads do get blocked off during winter storms. Mr. Stevenson said the proposed plan is not official. the road will be similar, but he has to wait to find out what City Officials tell him to do. Mr. Lewis asked if the applicant could provide the space on his property for a side street to access the three lots rather than access from Olympic View Drive. Mr. Stevenson said access from Olympic View Drive is not a good idea and he has room for a side road to access the three proposed sites. Mr. Lewis inquired why the access was not addressed in the declaration of nonsignificance. He inquired if the rezone had any conditions that prohibit access from Olympic View Drive. Ms. Block noted that this. is not a contract rezone. She felt this issue could be addressed as part of the SEPA conditions since it is stated in the checklist. Mr. Stevenson said he would be willing to add whatever the City wishes to the SEPA documents. Howard Wise, 6917 176th Avenue Southwest, said he lives directly west of the proposed rezone. He said he does not object to the rezone. He is concerned about the traffic conditions because of the hazards at the intersection of 176th and Olympic View Drive. He said visibility is poor and it is extremely difficult to cross at that point. Mr. Wise felt the Board should look at the impact 11 homes (8 new homes) would have on that intersection. He noted that area is in need of a traffic light at this time. He said he has no problem with the rezone itself. Mr. Lewis inquired if most residents recognize that they must go around the hill during inclement weather. Mr. Wise said most do. He explained that to get to the Stevenson property, you would have to go down a hill which is usually closed off during winter storms. Mr. Lewis explained to Mr. Wise that during a rezone hearing, the Board generally does not look at the traffic concerns. Traffic concerns are addressed at the subdivision level. At that time, the City will thoroughly review these issues. Mr. Allen said he can see no reason why the property should not be rezoned. He said he has never seen standing water in the intersection of 176th and Olympic View Drive, at least not on the Edmonds side. He noted that visibility is poor for all roads which access onto Olympic View Drive dnd he did not -Feel Lhere is much to be done about these problems. He felt these concerns would be addressed during the subdivision review. MR. LEWIS MOVED, SECONDED BY MR. STAY, THAT THE BOARD RECOMMEND COUNCIL APPROVE R-4-90 AS PROPOSED WITH A RECOMMENDATION THAT THE STAFF REVIEW THE CONDITIONS OF ACCESS ONTO OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE AND IF NECESSARY PRIOR TO SUBMITTAL TO THE COUNCIL, STAFF MODIFY THE DECLARATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE TO PROHIBIT THIS ACCESS. MOTION CARRIED. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES Page 2, December 12, 1990 l MS. Block explained that when this rezone goes before the Council there will be notices sent to surrounding neighbors along with postings on the property itself. She said she did not anticipated this going before the Council for at least two months. ADOPTION OF DEFINITIONS FOR GROUP HOMES AND HALFWAY HOMES Ms. Block reminded the _?_rd of their request for defln'itiers for each of the uses to go along with the ordinance. She explained that in the course of drafting the definitions, Mr. Snyder, the City Attorney, decided that halfway houses did not readily fit under the RM zone and should be placed in CG zones instead. He modified the ordinance draft. His modification was provided to each Board member. Ms. Block reviewed the draft ordinance and definitions. She noted that the definition of group homes would include alcoholics and drug abusers who had already completed treatment; those currently receiving treatment would be included in residential treatment facilities in an RM zone, with a conditional use permit; and current abusers, being incarcerated for detoxification and treatment would be allowed in halfway houses, only in CG zones. Mr. Lewis suggested that 16.30.010 (A) (3) be defined into two separate numbers as follows: 3. Retirement homes 4. Group homes for the disabled The remainder of the Board concurred with this change. Mr. Cooper inquired if the group home definition would include care for the elderly in a residential home rather.than in a nursing home. Ms. Block explained that this type of care is already required to be allowed by state law. She said these types of facilities are included in the definition of a group home. Ms. Phillips suggested that perhaps the City should include these uses, specifically, in the group home definition. Ms.' Block indicated that she felt they were already included in the group home definition. She noted, however, that nursing homes are not allowed as group homes. Ms. Block said she would discuss this matter with the City Attorney to determine if group homes for the elderly should be called out as a separate category. MR. COOPER MOVED, SECONDED BY MS. PHILLIPS, THAT THE BOARD RECOMMEND THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE ON GROUP HOMES AND HALFWAY HOUSES. THIS ORDINANCE SHOULD INCLUDE A REFERENCE TO ELDERLY GROUP HOMES BEING INCLUDED IN GROUP HOMES IF DEEMED APPROPRIATE TO THE CITY ATTORNEY, AND CREATING A NUMBER 3 AND 4 IN SECTION 16.30.010 (A) AS DISCUSSED EARLIER. MOTION CARRIED. DISCUSSION OF SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM AMENDMENTS Ms. Block said the Board discussed these amendments in September. Since that time, there have been quite a few changes. She explained that the discussion was continued until after Initiative 527 was decided upon. She noted that this Initiative failed. Therefore, she felt the Board should begin their discussions of wetland regulations soon. Ms. Block indicated that the City has received amended guidelines from the State which are excellent. They also received guidelines for wetlands management from the Water Quality Authority. Ms. Block noted that the Board has already adopted the proposal for wetlands guidelines. This has come back from the State with very few comments. The City will have to develop a classification system. Ms. Block said it will be interesting to see what the legislature does, whether they adopt just state guidelines or include those from the Water Quality Authority, also. In the meantime, the board will need to discuss these issues. She said she anticipates that they can place this discussion on the Board's February 27 agenda. Mr. Allen felt the Board should make plans to work on this issue early next year. Ms. Block said she would get copies of the documents from the state to each Board member prior to the retreat. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES Page 3, December 12, 1990 o jjl� I n 1Ih t y u M 3AV '4199 (09 ) of NI -ld '4199 o. 0 O M M'S " ld '4199 N` N/ [31 00 g � N h ♦ M b . m a I� a EXHIBIT 3 EXHIBIT 4 FILE# R-4-90 SUPPLEMENTAL MITIGATED* DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE Description of proposal Rezone from RS-12 to RS-8 *1. Access must be onto 176th Street S.W. *2. A 10' dedication of right of way is required along 176th St. S.W. Proponent Kenneth A. Stevenson Location of proposal, including street address, if any 17510 Olympic View Drive; 6815 176th St. S.W. and 6831 176th St. S.W Lead Agency City of Edmonds Planning Division 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 (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.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 February 19, 1991 Responsible Official Mary Lou Block Position/Title Planning Manager Phone 771-3202 Address 250 5th Ave. N., Edmonds, WA 98020 Date 2/5/91 Signature X You may appeal this determination of nonsignificance to James Driscoll, Hearing Examiner at 250 5th Ave. North, Edmonds, WA 98020 no later than 5:00 p.m., March 1, 1991 by filing a written appeal citing reasons. You should be prepared to make specific factual objections. Contact Mary Lou Block to read or ask about the procedures for SEPA appeals. There is no agency appeal. REVENUE } PlM'neer National Title Insurance Company WASHINGTON TITLE DIVISION led for Record at Request of C THIS SPALE RESERVED FOR RECORDER'S USE. FORM t.ae it Quit Claim Deed THE GRANTOR KRO= A. STEVENSM for and in consideration of MMm) MU FCR PE—ZCNE convey and quitclaim • to CITY OF EMvLNDS the following described real estate, situated in the County of SNCHMUSH State of Washington including any interest therein which grantor may hereafter acquire: Dated this day of ... _.. ...........(SEAS.) STATE OF WASHINGTON, County of ) t ss. On this day personally appeared before me to me known to be the individual described in and who executed the within and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that signed the same as free and voluntary act and deed, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned. GIVEAjri id2i}ly idl�audofficial seal this -D. I day of e -h �� 1 S q o . < r A".._.._..._..._......._...__ ' _.._. 4 Notary Public m State u and for t16e of Wor11R,F , ` ?g. `�ticlt l� QF •WhJ::�`TTII EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION - K.A STEVENSON JOB NO. 90-146-A DECEMBER, 1990 L486.2 LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF 176TH STREET R.O.W. DEDICATION REZONE AREA R-4-90 - CITY OF EDMONDS NORTHWEST OF INTERSECTION OF OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE AND 176TH ST. S.W. TOTAL PARCEL• THE SOUTH 10.00 FEET OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PARCEL: ALL THAT PORTION OF TRACTS 145 AND 146, MEADOWDALE BEACH AND OF VACATED 68TH STREET ADJACENT TO SAID TRACTS BEGINNING AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE WESTERLY LINE OF EDMONDS-BEVERLY PARK ROAD AND 'THE NORTH LINE OF 176TH STREET SOUTHWEST; THENCE SOUTH 89057' WEST ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF 176TH STREET SOUTHWEST FOR 97.1 FEET TO A POINT THAT IS 85 FEET WEST FROM THE EAST LINE OF SAID TRACT 145; THENCE NORTH 0047' EAST 240 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89057' EAST 180.43 FEET TO THE WESTERLY LINE OF EDMONDS-BEVERLY PARK ROAD; THENCE SOUTH 21049' WEST ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE 255.41 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, AS PER PLAT RECORDED IN VOLUME 5 OF PLATS ON PAGE 38, RECORDS OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY. SUBJECT TO ALL EASEMENTS, RESTRICTIONS AND RESERVATIONS. SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH, STATE OF WASHINGTON. 12-Zl-90 L486.2 90-146-A 122190 DJA PAGE 1 OF 1 FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW CITY OF EDMONDS REZONE CITY OF EDMONDS FILE: ##R-4-90 After notification in conformance with law, the Planning Board of the City of Edmonds conducted a public hearing on December 12, 1990 on a rezone application submitted by Kenneth A. Stevenson. The applicant has requested approval of a proposal to change the zoning on his property and two other properties located to the west of his property from RS-12, Single Family Residential 12,000 square foot lots, to RS-8, Single Family Residential 8,000 square foot lots. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The rezone area is located at 17510 Olympic View Drive, 6815 and 6831 176th Street S.W. in the City of Edmonds. 2. Surrounding land uses are residential in nature; zoning to the south is RS-8, to the west is RS-8, to the east in Lynnwood is RR-8400, and to the north is RS-12. The Lynnwood zoning is their closest counterpart to Edmonds RS-8 classification. 3. A mitigated determination of nonsignificance has been issued by the City on the rezone request. The two mitigating conditions are as follows: 1) That the applicants dedicate 10 feet of right of way along 176th Street S. W. for the future construction of road improvements, and 2) That all access to the properties to be rezoned come off of 176th Street S.W., with no access off of Olympic View Drive. 4. The subject property is designated by the Comprehensive Plan Map as Low Density Residential. Both RS-12 and RS-8 classifications are considered Low Density Residential. 5. The applicant is requesting to rezone the subject property from RS-12 to RS-8 to allow for approximately four additional dwelling units at this location. The proposed rezone would be consistent with the existing zoning on three sides of this property and, further, would be consistent with the goals of Washington State's Growth Management Act and the goals of Snohomish County Tomorrow. 6. No opposition to the rezone request was expressed at the public hearing, although one gentleman did express concern about traffic and drainage in Lynnwood. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The Comprehensive Policy Plan Map designates the subject property as Low Density Residential. Both RS-12 and RS-8 zoning are Planning Board ommendation gage 2 #R-3-90 consistent with this classification. Surrounding zoning is primarily RS-8, both in Edmonds and in Lynnwood. 2. A rezone of this property would be consistent with the goals of the State Growth Management Act and also with the Snohomish County Tomorrow Program, which has been adopted by the City of Edmonds. 3. No opposition to the rezone has been expressed by the surrounding residents or property owners. RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL The Planning Board of the City of Edmonds recommends to the City Council that Rezone Application R-4-90 be approved, with the mitigating conditions which were included in the supplemental Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance. This recommendation was passed unanimously by the Planning Board. PASSED the 12th day of December, 1990. DONALD STAY, CHAIR EDMONDS PLANNING B R490RES/TXTMLB51 THESE MINUTES SUBJECT TO JANUARY 9 APPROVAL PLANNING BOARD MINUTES December 12, 1990 The regular meeting of the Edmonds Planning Board was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairperson Bill Allen in the Plaza Meeting Room of the Edmonds Library Building. PRESENT ABSENT STAFF PRESENT Bill Allen, Chair Sharon Claussen Mary Lou Block, Plan. Div. Mgr. Dean Nordquist Karin Noyes, Recorder Mike Cooper Don Stay Hank Lewis Janet Phillips Ms. Claussen was excused from the meeting for business responsibilities. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MR. COOPER MOVED, SECONDED BY MR. STAY, TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 28, 1990 AS SUBMITTED. MOTION CARRIED, WITH MS. PHILLIPS ABSTAINING BECAUSE SHE WAS NOT PRESENT AT THAT MEETING. STAFF AND PLANNING BOARD COMMENTS Ms. Block invited all Board members to attend the City's Employee Christmas Party on December 14 at the Senior Center. Tickets are available to purchase at City Hall. SET DATE FOR PLANNING BOARD RETREAT The Board discussed potential dates for the 1991 retreat and decided upon January 12, 1991. The retreat will begin at 9 a.m. at Mr. Stay's home, 715 Sprague. There will be a pot luck lunch and the City will provide chicken. PUBLIC HEARING ON REZONE R-4-90 FROM RS-12 to RS-8 at 17510 Olympic View Drive Ms. Block reviewed the staff report and displayed transparencies to orient the Board and audience to the property being proposed for rezone. She also indicated the topography of the lots. She indicated that the zoning on three sides is RS-8; zoning to the north is RS-12. With a rezone the land would accomodate a total of approximately 11-12 lots, without the rezone approximately 7-8 lots. Mr. Lewis inquired if the declaration of nonsignificance was issued on the entire rezone area or on each lot separately. Ms. Block said it was issued on the area as a whole. Mr. Lewis asked if there were any comments made about the traffic. Ms. Block said there were no comments about the traffic. Ms. Block said the City received a letter from Mr. Thomas Reynolds stating that he is not opposed to the rezone itself. However, he had concerns regarding the drainage and traffic problems which already exist in the area. Ms. Phillips said she is concerned about the traffic impacts. If the City approves the rezone, could they include any stipulations regarding traffic. Ms. Block pointed out that this is not a contract rezone and no conditions can be proposed by the City. Ms. Phillips said she is concerned about the driveways accessing Onto Olympic View Drivo. She felt this would be dangerous and access to the property should come from 176th. Ms. Block said the applicant has indicated that his discussion with the City Engineer included moving the existing driveway to the west if the property is to be subdivided. Mr. Nordquist inquired if the existing houses on the other two properties will be torn down. Ms. Block explained that there has been no indication that this would happen. She said these two property owners have not expressed any desire to subdivide at this time. Mr. Cooper inquired if there is an application for a subdivision on the applicant's property. Ms. Block said there has not been an application filed for a subdivision. However, she noted it is typical for the applicant to seek the rezone prior to presenting an application and subdivision layout plan. There is a schematic plan for a three lot subdivision which was enclosed in the packets. As clarification, Ms. Block said that since the slopes are over 15 percent on parts of the ?'?nlicant'e nrnnorty, he Would be subject to th- ranitlatinnc fnr Tard.cllde. hazard arpac Shp noted that the majority of areas falling under these regulations are located in RS-12 and RS-20 zones. Kenneth Stevenson, 18403 72nd Avenue West, said he is the owner of the property adjacent to Olympic View Drive, 17510 Olympic View Drive. He said the staff did a thorough review of the property. In reference to the letter from Mr. Reynolds, Mr. Stevenson said he called the City of Lynnwood's Public Works Director and was told that Mr. Reynolds has complained in recent years and the City of Lynnwood has placed culverts and drains all around his property. He also indicated that.the City of Lynnwood cleans the ditches each spring. Mr. Stevenson said that in the years he has lived in the area, he has never seen standing water on 176th. In regard to access, Mr. Stevenson said he talked with the City's Traffic Engineer. The Traffic Engineer indicated that the existing driveway needs to be moved west 10 or 15 feet to obtain the proper sight distance. Mr. Stevenson said Mr. Bagdon and Mr. Davis, the two participants in the rezone are near retirement and have no plans at this time to subdivide their properties. However, they would like the rezone at this time for inheritance purposes. Mr. Stevenson said that during inclement weather, everyone parks on the flat areas. He said people park on the front of his property each winter. He said the roads do get blocked off during winter storms. Mr. Stevenson said the proposed plan is not official. the road will be similar, but he has to wait to find out what City Officials tell him to do. Mr. Lewis asked if the applicant could provide the space on his property for a side street to access the three lots rather than access from Olympic View Drive. Mr. Stevenson said access from Olympic View Drive is not a good idea and he has room for a side road to access the three proposed sites. Mr. Lewis inquired why the access was not addressed in the declaration of nonsignificance. He inquired if the rezone had any conditions that prohibit access from Olympic View Drive. Ms. Block noted that this is not a contract rezone. She felt this issue could be addressed as part of the SEPA conditions since it is stated in the checklist. Mr. Stevenson said he would be willing to add whatever the City wishes to the SEPA documents. Howard Wise, 6917 176th Avenue Southwest, said he lives directly west of the proposed rezone. He said he does not object to the rezone. He is concerned about the traffic conditions because of the hazards at the intersection of 176th and Olympic View Drive. He said visibility is poor and it is extremely difficult to cross at that point. Mr. Wise felt the Board should look at the impact 11 homes (8 new homes) would have on that intersection. He noted that area is in need of a traffic light at this time. He said he has no problem with the rezone itself. Mr. Lewis inquired if most residents recognize that they must go around the hill during inclement weather. Mr. Wise said most do. He explained that to get to the Stevenson property, you would have to go down a hill which is usually closed off during winter storms. Mr. Lewis explained to Mr. Wise that during a rezone hearing, the Board generally does not look at the traffic concerns. Traffic concerns are addressed at the subdivision level. At that time, the City will thoroughly review these issues. Mr. Allen said he can see no reason why the property should not be rezoned. He said he has never seen standing water in the intersection of 176th and Olympic View Drive, at least not on the Edmonds side. He noted that visibility is poor for all roads which access onto Olympic View Drive and hC diu riuL Feei Lhere is much to be done about these problems. He felt these concerns would be addressed during the subdivision review. MR. LEWIS MOVED, SECONDED BY MR. STAY, THAT THE BOARD RECOMMEND COUNCIL APPROVE R-4-90 AS PROPOSED WITH A RECOMMENDATION THAT THE STAFF REVIEW THE CONDITIONS OF ACCESS ONTO OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE AND IF NECESSARY PRIOR TO SUBMITTAL TO THE COUNCIL, STAFF MODIFY THE DECLARATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE TO PROHIBIT THIS ACCESS. MOTION CARRIED. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES Page 2, December 12, 1990 MS. Block explained that when this rezone goes before the Council there will be notices sent to surrounding neighbors along with postings on the property itself. She said she did not anticipated this going before the Council for at least two months. ADOPTION OF DEFINITIONS FOR GROUP HOMES AND HALFWAY HOMES Ms. Block rem;-ded t`•e __,rd of their request for definitinns fer each of the uses to go along with the ordinance. She explained that in the course of drafting the definitions, Mr. Snyder, the City Attorney, decided that halfway houses did not readily fit under the RM zone and should be placed in CG zones instead. He modified the ordinance draft. His modification was provided to each Board member. Ms. Block reviewed the draft ordinance and definitions. She noted that the definition of group homes would include alcoholics and drug abusers who had already completed treatment; those currently receiving treatment would be included in residential treatment facilities in an RM zone, with a conditional use permit; and current abusers, being incarcerated for detoxification and treatment would be allowed in halfway houses, only in CG zones. Mr. Lewis suggested that 16.30.010 (A) (3) be defined into two separate numbers as follows: 3. Retirement homes 4. Group homes for the disabled The remainder of the Board concurred with this change. Mr. Cooper inquired if the group home definition would include care for the elderly in a residential home rather than in a nursing home. Ms. Block explained that this type of care is already required to be allowed by state law. She said these types of facilities are included in the definition of a group home. Ms. Phillips suggested that perhaps the City should include these uses, specifically, in the group home definition. Ms. Block indicated that she felt they were already included in the group home definition. She noted, however, that nursing homes are not allowed as group homes. Ms. Block said she would discuss this matter with the City Attorney to determine if group homes for the elderly should be called out as a separate category. MR. COOPER MOVED, SECONDED BY MS. PHILLIPS, THAT THE BOARD RECOMMEND THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE ON GROUP HOMES AND HALFWAY HOUSES. THIS ORDINANCE SHOULD INCLUDE A REFERENCE TO ELDERLY GROUP HOMES BEING INCLUDED IN GROUP HOMES IF DEEMED APPROPRIATE TO THE CITY ATTORNEY, AND CREATING A NUMBER 3 AND 4 IN SECTION 16.30.010 (A) AS DISCUSSED EARLIER. MOTION CARRIED. DISCUSSION OF SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM AMENDMENTS Ms. Block said the Board discussed these amendments in September. Since that time, there have been quite a few changes. She explained that the discussion was continued until after Initiative 527 was decided upon. She noted that this Initiative failed. Therefore, she felt the Board should begin their discussions of wetland regulations soon. Ms. Block indicated that the City has received amended guidelines from the State which are excellent. They also received guidelines for wetlands management from the Water Quality Authority. Ms. Block noted that the Board has already adopted the proposal for wetlands guidelines. This has come back from the State with very few comments. The City will have to develop a classification system. Ms. Block said it will be interesting to see what the legislature does, whether they adopt just state guidelines or include those from the Water Quality Authority, also. In the meantime, the board will need to discuss these issues. She said she anticipates that they can place this discussion on the Board's February 27 agenda. Mr. Allen felt the Board should make plans to work on this issue early next year. Ms. Block said she would get copies of the documents from the state to each Board member prior to the retreat. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES Page 3, December 12, 1990 8g0_lg y" CITY OF EDMONDS 250 - 5TH AVE. N. • EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (206) 771-3202 COMMUNITY SERVICES: Public Works • Planning • Parks and Recreation • Engineering LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL Date: December 7, 1990 To: Kenneth A. Stevenson 17510 Olympic View Drive Edmonds, WA 98020 Subject: Rezone R-4-90 Transmitting: Planning Board Staff Report For your information: XXX As you requested: As we discussed: For your file: y�yryv Comment and return: Note attached comments: Comments: ,;c: Ed Davis, Western Surveyors Edward F. Bagdon Robert M. Davis Planning Division Mary Lou Block, Planning Manager LARRY S. NAUGHTEN MAYOR PETER E. HAHN DIRECTOR • Incorporated August 11, 1890 • Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan 2 ►. THIS PACKET SENT TO THE - PLANNING BOARD 12/7/90 EXHIBIT LIST R-4-90 EXHIBIT 1 - STAFF REPORT EXHIBIT 2 - SITE PLAN EXHIBIT 3 - LEGAL DESCRIPTION EXHIBIT 4 - VICINITY MAP EXHIBIT 5 - POTENTIAL SUBDIVISION OF 17510 OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE EXHIBIT 6 - SITE WITH SURROUNDING ZONING Exhibit 1 STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING BOARD FILE: #R-4-90 HEARING DATE: December 12, 1990 I. REQUESTED ACTION: Rezone of property located at 17510 Olympic View Drive, 681.5 and 6831 176th S.W. from RS-12 to RS- 8. (Single family residential, 12,000 sq. ft. lot to Single family residential, 8,000 sq. ft. lot) II. PROPONENT: Kenneth A. Stevenson 17510 Olympic View Drive Edmonds, WA 98020 OTHER PARTICIPANTS: Edward F. Bagdon 6815 176th S.W. Robert M. Davis 6831 176th S.W. III. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: See Exhibit 3. IV. STAFF FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: A. Description of Subject Property and Surrounding Area The City has received an application to rezone the area described above from RS-12 to RS-8. The total land area involved is approximately 116,600 square feet (112,700 square feet when the required 10 foot dedication along 176th ST. S.W. is subtracted from the total). This area would accommodate approximately 7-8 lots at RS-12 density and 11-12 at a RS-8 density, depending on the development pattern and the effect of the topography on site design The property is located north of 176th Street S.W. and west of Olympic View Drive. The land across Olympic View Drive to the east is located in the City of Lynnwood. The site slopes down toward the east with an overall elevation change of approximately 12%; the eastern portion of the site has slopes to a maximum of 18-20%. The vegetation is essentially that of a residential area, with open meadows, some trees and shrubs. There are both evergreen and deciduous trees, including some old fruit trees. Staff Report R-3-90 Dage 2 Surrounding land uses are single family residential. Zoning to the east, in Lynnwood, is RR-8400. Zoning to the south is RS-8, to the west is RS-8, and to the north is RS-12. B. Official Street Map Proposed Existing Olympic View Drive 60' 60' 176th St. S.W. 60' 50' C. Rezone Criteria 1. Does the proposed zoning change conform with the Comprehensive Plan? The Comprehensive Policy Plan Map designates the subject property as Low Density Residential. Both RS-8 and RS-12 zoning designations are classified as low density residential. 2. Is the proposed zoning consistent with the purposes of the Zoning Ordinance? A rezone to RS-8 would bring the zoning of this property into consistency with the zoning of a majority of the immediately surrounding area. This property is bounded on three sides by RS-8 zoning. What is the relationship of the proposed zoning change to existing land uses and zoning of surrounding or nearby areas? The zoning in the immediate area is predominately RS-8. In the general area, the zoning is a mixture of RS-8 and RS-12. 4. Have there been sufficient changes in the character of the immediate or surrounding area or City policy to justify the rezone? There have been no recent changes to the character of the area. The surrounding zoning has been the same for a number of years. The area in Lynnwood has developed as RR 8400. The only change that would significantly affect this action is the change in policy which speaks to encouraging infill development in urban areas of the State, County and City. 5. Is the property suitable both economically and physically for the uses allowed under the existing zoning and proposed zoning? The subject area is suitable for development under either its existing zoning or the proposed zoning. Staff Report R-3-90 °age 3 6. What is the relative gain to the public health, safety and welfare as compared to the potential increase or decrease in value to the property owners? Rezoning of this area to RS-8 would result in more efficient land use as it would allow the creation of 11-12 lots instead of the 7-8 lots allowed under RS-12. This small increase in density, accomplished while maintaining the single family nature of the area, would be consistent with the directives of the Growth Management Act. The property owner would receive the economic value of an additional lot; the public would potentially have the availability of additional housing units, but would also receive the additional traffic and other effects related to increased density. V. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDING: Declaration of nonsignificance has been issued on this proposed rezone request. No significant adverse environmental impact should result from the approval of the rezone. This determination is made based on a dedication of 10 feet of right of way along 176th S.W. VI. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommendation is for approval of the rezone. Although it is desirable to retain the more open, less urban feeling of the community under a lower density zoning, the State Growth Management Act and adoption of its principles under the Snohomish County Tomorrow Program encourage the incremental increase in density accomplished by a rezone of this type. The proposed RS-8 zoning is consistent with the zoning surrounding this property on three sides. RE490/TXTMLB51 �1 v 8 LEGAL DESCRIPTION - K. A. STEVENSON JOB NO. 90-146-A NOVEMBER, 1990 L486 LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF REZONE AREA R-4-90 - CITY OF EDMONDS NORTHWEST OF INTERSECTION OF OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE AND 176TH ST. S.W. TOTAL PARCEL: ALL THAT PORTION OF TRACTS 145 AND. 146, MEADOWDALE BEACH AND OF VACATED 68TH STREET ADJACENT TO SAID TRACTS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE WESTERLY LINE OF EDMONDS- BEVERLY PARK ROAD (OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE) AND THE NORTH LINE OF 176TH STREET SOUTHWEST; THENCE SOUTH 89057' WEST ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF 176TH STREET SOUTHWEST FOR 97.1 FEET TO A POINT THAT IS 85 FEET WEST FROM THE EAST LINE OF SAID TRACT 145; THENCE NORTH 0047' EAST 240 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89057' EAST 180.43 FEET TO THE WESTERLY LINE OF EDMONDS-BEVERLY PARK ROAD; THENCE SOUTH 21049' WEST ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE 255.41 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, AS PER PLAT RECORDED IN VOLUME 5 OF PLATS ON PAGE 38, RECORDS OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY. SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH, STATE OF WASHINGTON. TOGETHER WITH THE SOUTH 303.00 FEET OF THE EAST 148.00 FEET OF THE WEST 428.00 FEET OF SAID TRACT 145; .TOGETHER WITH THE EAST 147.00 FEET OF THE WEST 575.00 FEET OF THE SOUTH 303.00 FEET OF SAID TRACT 145. SUBJECT TO ALL EASEMENTS, RESTRICTIONS AND RESERVATIONS. SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH, STATE OF WASHINGTON. L486 90-146-A 112790 DJA I1- Z7-90 Exhibit 3 PAGE 1 OF 1 Ll co o I� i N �) W vi -• '3Ad411111 1— N ^ ` I m .. - F7L ObN 11 I 1 1 I Q a Plj Q H �f qhlN h W c 'M '3AV '4199 m o g or M " id '4199 W h Opb K �id,0 2TTO 7— 'M Q a a to h o ' 'Id '449910 7` ,Ol °w � i11 �� a(� r 4rg.9 ` Q�Zl1 t/7 tl3H9 m N~ S� (Oyu g N h r( h .( rl 1t id 4Q w " -' _-_ TV Z I ( 965 00 y t7'Nl o O h 1 b N _ W$ N 3Atl 4169 F __ C+ r1..—T._T--- a —a til A m a r m 3ne g 44tm,: bi"Id 4 - --'4 0 26 91 r7 N e1bFa° f arr �� h a g h 4Q o I so +1 ` JS3 9 j 4 '0 L o� -- INyozLL 4m N des• o a b 3 I m z o h co Co rc 3AV 'PUU J& Shay' PLAT MAP SECTION 8 TOWNSHIP Z7 RANGE • ,a Al 9,/0 o ti Q pp \ i y W 1 to / A ,�; �/ v r � lotbo .$t 4D4E of RAvErr--Nr C1Eo- TEpse PowER POLO �5 \ 99� t r • T�LBPNONE • MRM ce '�— Nd9•.i9�F,i"�✓�M �� S.S. MANHOLE N 0 /7$ STIeE.., :T .S'w q fiR-1 NYORANr aAr�= -9/Z$IVQ XONIN4 t R. S. J VO / 70 TAL .AREA : 31,974 0 'Wex tern Exhibit 5 !"c -- WESTERN SURVEYORS, INC. -- 13322 Highway 99 South, Everett,WA 98204 Phooes:, 742-5500 or 355-2776 WSIPL26 JOB NO."" %O. 078-�f A lti r 0 SOD -t• Zk oL tA � C PlnWesrnue orsc. LAND USE CONSULTANTS CIVIL ENGINEERS • LAND SURVEYORS 13322 Highway 99 South • Everett, WA 98204 (206) 742-5500 or 355-2776 •R FF� i i mam CtZy, A14 - je 7r aj WE ARE SENDING YOU ZKttached ❑ Shop drawings F1 r..nnv of lattar LEM OF TaQaWTVAL DATW Q� YOUR JOB. NO. JOB NO. ATTENTION are — RE: ❑ Under separate cover via the following items: prints El Plans ❑ Samples ❑ Specifications n (.hnnna nrriar 7 COPIES DATE NO. DESCRIPTION THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below: ❑ For approval ❑ Approved as submitted ❑ Resubmit copies for approval PFOr your use ❑ Approved as noted ❑Submit copies for distribution ❑ As requested ❑ Returned for corrections ❑ Return corrected prints ❑ For review and comment ❑ ❑ FOR BIDS DUE 19 ❑ PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US REMARKS COPY TO A, A SIGNED: White — Client If enclosures are not as noted, kindly notify us at once. ellow — File In, a�i 04j Obi ly o r6 00 /0 /V-- go P, Oct, ------------- lk ki I ko N Submit to County Treasurer of the This form is your receipt when Stamped county in which property is located. REAL ESTATE EXCISE TAX by cashier. Pay by cash or certified CHAPTER 82.45 RCW check to County Treasurer. PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT CHAPTER 458.61 WACC� THIS AFFIDAVIT WILL NAT F1F Ar:r!EPTEn 11NLESS ITEMS In THRI111r:N M ARE FIILLY MUPLETFD Name Kenneth A. Stevenson Name City of Edmonds street 18403 72nd Ave. W. Street 250 5th Ave. N. NZ Q0 c� c� city Edmonds state WA zip 98026 city . Edmonds state WA zip 98020 ® City of Edmonds ALL TAX PARCEL NUMBERS NEW OWNER'S Name PERMANENT ADDRESS 51 31 -000-145-0304 FOR ALL PROPERTY Street 250 5th Ave. N. TAX RELATED 5131-000-145-0908, 5131-000-145- CORRESPONDENCE City/State Edmonds, WA Zip 98020 LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY SITUATED IN UNINCORPORATED COUNTY 0 OR IN CITY OF Edmonds See Attached Exhibit A QIs this property currently: YES NO Classified or designated as forest land? ElChapter El 84.33 RCW Classified as current use land (open space,Pn ❑ farm and agricultural, or timber)? Chapter 84.34 RCW Exempt from property tax under nonprofit ❑ organizations Chapter 84.36 RCW? Receiving special valuation as historic ❑ property under Chapter 84.26 RCW? Type Property: ❑ land only ❑ land with new building. ❑ land with previously ❑ land with mobile home used building SEE TAX OBLIGATIONS ON REVERSE SIDE (1) NOTICE OF CONTINUANCE (RCW) 84.33 or RCW 84.34) It the new owner(s) of land that is classified or designated as current use or forest land wish(es) to continue the classification or designation of such land, the new owner(s) must sign below. If the now owner(s) do(es) not desire to continue such classification or designation, all compensating or additional tax calculated pursuant to RCW 84.33.120 and 140 or RCW 84.34.108 shall be due and payable by the seller or transferor at the time of sale. The county assessor must determine if the lend transferred qualifies to continue classification or designation and'must so indicate below. Signatures do not necessarily mean the land will remain in classification or designation. If it no longer qualifies, it will be removed and the compensating taxes will be applied. All new owners must sign. This land ❑ does ❑ does not qualify for continuance. DEPUTY ASSESSOR DATE (3) NOTICE OF COMPLIANCE (Chapter 84.26 RCW) If the new owner(s) of property with special valuation as historic property wish(s) to continue this special valuation the new owner(s) must sign below. If the new owner(s) doles) not desire to continue such special valuation, all add l- tionai tax calculated pursuant to Chapter 84.26 RCW, shall be due and payable by the seller or transferor at the time of sale. (3) OWNER($) SIGNATURE Q Description of personal property if included in sale (furniture, ap- pliances, etc.) Public Right -of -Way If exemption claimed, explain Municipal Type of Document Quit Claim Deed Date of Document December 21, 1990 Gross Sale Price 1 / $ Personal Property (deduct) 21 $ Taxable Sale Price $ Excise Tax: State $ Local3/ $ Delinquent Interest: 4/ State $ Local $ Delinquent Penalty: 4/ State $ Total Due $ (SEE 1.5 ON REVERSE SIDE) AFFIDAVIT I CERTIFY UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON THAT THE FOREGOING IS TRUE AND CORRECT (see #5 on reverse for penalties). SIGNATURE NAME (print) Diane M.Cunningham ,,, DATE 8 PLACE OF SIGNING:�P(Ci tc" fC�ld✓ SPECIFY (circle): grantor/grantee/grantor's agent grantee's agent- Address of residence or place of business of person signing (specify): 250 5th Ave. N. Edmonds WA 98020 CO ,. The following optional questions are requested by RCW 82.45.120 Is property at the time of sale: YES NO e. Does conveyance involve a trade, partial YES NO a. Subject to elderly, disability, or physical improvement 1 ❑ 2 ❑ interest corporate affiliates, related parties, trust, receivership or an estate? 1 ❑ 2 ❑ exemption? I. Is the grantee acting as a nominee for a third 1 ❑ 2 ❑ b. Does building, if any, have a heat pump or solar 1 ❑ 2 ❑ party? heating or cooling system? g. Principal use: c. Does this conveyance divide a current parcel of land? 1 ❑ 2 ❑ 1 ❑agricultural 2 El condominium 3 ❑recreational d. Does sale include current crop or merchantable 1 El 2 ❑ 4 ❑ apt (4+ units) 5 ❑ industrial 6 ❑ residential 7 ❑ commercial 8 ❑ mobile home 9 ❑ timber FOR TREASURER'S USE ONLY FORM REV 84-0001 3m (7188) -1155- COUNTY TREASURER I� Page 5, February 4 - 8, 1991 DATE DATE *** END **** DOC TYPE CH* LEAD AGENCY ** PROPOSAL ISSUED MAILED REVIEW ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- DNS 3 WA State Dept. Remove an existing crushed rock stockpile from a gravel pit and 02/04/91 02/19/91 of Natural revegetate the site, 2 miles E of Marblemount, Skagit County Resources 4 City of Oak Spring Time Div 1, divide 2 acres of a 3.25 acre site into 7 02/01/91 02/15/91 Harbor single family lots, at the end of 750 Ave W, W of 105 NW St (Ernest and Catherine Eerkes) 4 Island County Construct a 60 ft concrete bulkhead to protect a single family 02/05/91 02/19/91 residence, 866 E 5535, S Freeland, S Whidbey Island (Ronald F and Velta B Pollard) 4 Island County Construct a concrete bulkhead on Admiralty Inlet, 230 E lake St, 02/05/91 02/19/91 Freeland, S Whidbey island (Eugene and Patricia Pepper) 4 Island County Construct a 56 ft concrete bulkhead, Lot 29, lagoon Point, on 02/05/91 02/19/91 the E side of Steelhead Dr, S Whidbey Island (Philip M French) 5 City of Rezone 10 acres from Single Family to Parks and Schools for a 02/04/91 02/19/91 Bremerton future public school, HE of the intersection of Carr Blvd and Harlow Dr (Bremerton School District) 5 Kitsap County Replace a cement bulkhead with a 200 ft bulkhead, 15369 Broom St 02/01/91 02/19/91 NE, N end of Madison Bay, Bainbridge Island (Holt Webster) 5 Kitsap County Provide covered moorage on the LEI dock of Kingston Cove Marina, 02/04/91 02/21/91 on Apple Tree Cove (Port of Kingston) 5 Kitsap County Construct a pier -ramp -float extending 56 ft from the shoreline 02/04/91 02/21/91 with an `LI shaped float, 37652 Teel Lane, Sheltered Bay, Hood Canal, 2 miles SW of Hansvilte (Norman Kachman) 5 Kitsap County Face a storm damaged concrete bulkhead with a 225 ft concrete 02/05/91 02/20/91 bulkhead, 16289 Virginia Point Rd NE, W of Keyport on Liberty Bay (James Bergstrom) 5 Kitsap County Replace a destroyed wood bulkhead with a 100 ft tong rock 02/05/91 02/20/91 bulkhead, 195 NW Kinman Rd, N of Kitsap Memorial Park, Hood Canal (Dewey Yates) 5 Kitsap County Construct a 100 ft long rock bulkhead in front of an existing 02/06/91 02/21/91 deteriorated bulkhead, 4253 Pleasant Beach Dr, SW Bainbridge Island (Donald L Poggi) 6 City of Edmonds Construct a garage and breezeway adjacent to an existing single 02/04/91 02/19/91 family residence, 16431 - 74th Pl W (James L Solie) 6 City of Edmonds Construct a 3,000 sq ft single family residence with a 560 sq ft 02/04/91 02/19/91 detached garage, 15706 - 75th Pt W (Harrison Jewell) 6 City of Edmonds Construct a single family residence and garage,'15714 - 75th Pt 02/04/91 02/19/91 W (Jean Rigg(e) 6 City of Edmonds (Supplemental) Rezone from RS-12 to RS-8, divide into 3 single 02/05/91 02/19/91 family lots, 17510 Olympic View Dr, 6815 - 176th St SW, and 6831 - 176th St SW (Kenneth A Stevenson) 6 City of Everett (Addendum) Construct a 167 unit apartment complex on 2.8 acres 02/07/91 with 263 parking stalls, 59,000 cu yds of earth would be excavated and removed from the site, S of 37th St, N of 38th St, E of Grand Ave, W of Rucker (Charlie Morgan) 6 City of Lake Amend the Lake Stevens Comp Plan to incorporate policies which 02/05/91 Stevens address the ability of the city to utilize the environmental review process to mitigate development impacts to parks, streets, and schools, city-wide w Page 6, February 4 - 8, 1991 at DATE DATE *** END **** DOC TYPE CH* LEAD AGENCY ** PROPOSAL ISSUED MAILED REVIEW DNS 6 City of Demolish an existing single family residence and rezone a half 02/05/91 Mountlake acre lot from Single Family Residential to Residential Multiple Terrace Family Low Density, 22716 - 44th Ave W (Scott, Craig, and Ginger MacKay) 6 Port of Everett Remove the existing Alumina handling facility on Pier 1 and 02/01/91 02/16/91 replace it on Pier 3 with a pneumatic unit and a closed pipeline conveying system, W of Terminal Ave, N of Bond St, S of California Ave 6 Snohomish County Centennial Trail Project, develop 20 ft wide public trail for 01/22/91 02/18/91 pedestrians and cyclists and an 8 ft wide corridor of compacted earth for an equestrian trait, in 3 phases totalling 500 acres, from the City of Snohomish to 20th St in Hartford 6 Snohomish County Divide 18,000 sq ft into 2 single family lots, near Serene Lake, 01/25/91 02/01/91 on the S side of Serene Way, 1,800 ft N and E of its intersection with 140th St SW (Kegel and Assoc Inc) 6 Snohomish County Construct a single family residence and garage near Lake 01/29/91 02/04/91 02/19/91 Roesiger, 2322 Gemmer Rd (Jerry Akins) 6 Snohomish County Divide 2.2 acres into 2 single family lots, on the N side of 01/30/91 02/14/91 212th St SE, 800 ft W of its intersection with 78th Ave SE (Steven G Zech) 6 Snohomish County Divide 5.25 acres into 4 single family lots, SW of the 01/30/91 02/14/91 intersection of Chain Lake Rd and 197th Ave SE, 1 mile NE of Monroe (Cavassa and Assoc) 6 Snohomish County Place 2,100 cu yds of earth fill on a site being used as a plant 02/04/91 02/19/91 nursery, 4522 - 132nd St SE (James Nash) 6 Snohomish County (Addendum) Divide site into 2 single family residences, 20601 02/07/91 and 20603 Richmond Rd, Atderwood Manor (Norkri Corp) 6 WA State Dept. Remove talus rock to be used for rip rap along river banks in 02/04/91 02/19/91 of Natural and around Index, remove rock from an old quarry site, 0.5 miles Resources W of Index, Snohomish County (Roy Hoekema and John Connolly) 6 WA State Dept. Convert 3 acres of timberland into pasture, 3420 - 205th Or SE, 02/05/91 02/20/91 of Natural Snohomish County (Steve Sanders) Resources 7 Bellevue School Minor regrading of lower all-weather sand playfietd and improve 01/31/91 02/19/91 District the upper playfietd, recreation and physical education use will remain the same, Stevenson Elementary School, 14220 NE 8th St 7 Bellevue School Minor regrading of all-weather sand playfield, recreation and 01/31/91 02/19/91 District physical education uses will remain the same, Cherry Crest Elementary School, 12400 NE 32nd St 7 Bellevue School Minor regrading'of one all-weather sand playfield and improve 01/31/91 02/19/91 District the lower playfield, recreation and physical education use will remain the same, Sunset Elementary School, 3810 - 132nd Ave SE 7 Bellevue School Minor regrading of one all-weather sand playfield, recreation 01/31/91 02/19/91 District and physical education use will remain the same, Phantom Lake Elementary School, 1050 - 160th Ave SE 7 Bellevue School Replace portions of mechanical systems and piping, replace 02/04/91 02/23/91 District lighting, minor regrading of upper playfield, reopen Hyak Middle School to temporarily house Ardmore students, Ardmore Elementary School, 16616 NE 32nd St 7 City of Auburn (Reissued) Fill and grade an 11.8 acre site, construct a 2-story 02/04/91 concrete tilt up 150,000 sq ft office bldg with 919 parking stalls, at the Auburn 400 Corporate Park, between 15th St SW on the 9 and Boundary Blvd on the S (The Quadrant Corp) FILE# R-4-90 SUPPLEMENTAL MITIGATED* DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE Description of proposal Rezone from RS-12 to RS-8 *1. Access must be onto 176th Street S.W. *2. A 10' dedication of right of way is required along 176th St. S.W. Proponent Kenneth A. Stevenson Location of proposal, including street address, if any 17510 Olympic View Drive; 6815 176th St. S.W. and 6831 176th St. S.W Lead Agency City of Edmonds Planning Division 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 (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.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 February 19, 1991 Responsible Official Mary Lou Block Position/Title Planning Manager Phone 771-3202 Address 250 5th Ave. N., Edmonds, WA 98020 Date 2/5/91 Signature X You may appeal this determination of nonsignificance to James Driscoll, Hearing Examiner at 250 5th Ave. North, Edmonds, WA 98020 no later than 5:00 p.m., March 1, 1991 by filing a written appeal citing reasons. You should be prepared to make specific factual objections. Contact Mary Lou Block to read or ask about the procedures for SEPA appeals. There is no agency appeal. 890 19 Date CITY OF EDMONDS 250 - 5TH AVE. N. • EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (206) 771-3202 COMMUNITY SERVICES: Public Works • Planning • Parks and Recreation • Engineering LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL February 15, 1991 To: WA State Dept. of Ecology Environmental Revi-ew Section Mail Stop PV-11 Olympia, WA 98504-8711 Subject: R-4-90 r Transmitting: Supplemental Mitigated Determination of Nonsi gn i f i cance For your information: As you requested: As we discussed: For your file: Comment and return: XXX Note attached comments: Comments: cc: Ken Stevenson City of Lynnwood Inoho. County Planning Division Diane Cunningham LARRY S. NAUGHTEN MAYOR PETER E. HAHN DIRECTOR . • Incorporated August 11, 1890 • Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan 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 "proposal," "proposer," and "affected geographic area." respectively. A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: A/ A 2. Name of applicant: ICF�N�✓CIE: A s1 �S2�/�% SGE f�¢,2iicc 1�R6✓ S7- 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: 4. Date checklist prepared: -t/Zs-lrir, 5. Agency requesting checklist: 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): 2 z c>S tO2T PL. A 7 j 1S11KSr_S �ot�+✓7"/AC- S✓31P+✓iX0J CIF 47 ��� i4j��b'J e12o?Aw7"1l 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. 3 t-G T- s tt-02 Y F>Z_ R r o N t>0 r.rV77 ,qe, , �5 vie Pvv.sc�.c1 r, F 4>4¢d�6/ 3*4'Rs � t���'F�e re 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. 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. N'v 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. N VNi_ ii. Give UI'I el, couiplete your prc�NUsai, uiry the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. (here 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. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.) (Z i=ZO tit -To A t—<—cvc.4-/ c=-Z�, 2 3 L--.c;,'Ti S-j4-0l2'7 '111-AT o.v �'T�v,�.�eA-� PYZoPOMc % J' . /moo Svap j v % s/ *,! D F, D7¢v� s f ti3 C��a •.,S P10 jPZ-,r-T"Y / N Fv-r v rz E , 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 the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a 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. TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. Earth a. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other k YZ c R7 �z SG vpF o N S �a=-01160it F0- PAe7� p A-els , 4" t=- -�p-T� •5-i i 4#-7- St o E b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? 2 © C/O c. 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. ji4"+ a y t-a'q---t t To d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. No e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. N U N n.- ; C'xr i4 F'le_ -r Ham. i✓ c c 4 Ji9`i-f` 0 nN c: F f u vN �w D A.,S. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. N0 g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? -70 v 0 -E# - M Z 7- -t o X.2 c�✓Sp„J �s-&+,r r PV-4-7, 7>o-ns ✓ry *t— &$e Psi s , A4-6r ov tit ';Ni2opimm 7- h. Proposed mc3sures to , o ---� ._..�ii �.c �`� �,vn �i�a�� ci vn vn, vcinN ut. �� w file cal tip, if any: 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. rXHAt 'S'i" '*=20` t4j=,4V>' Eqv1 i>OAENT b. Are there any off -site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. N 0 , c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: 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. N 0 ti i✓ 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. & O 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. N '_' 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. /%,-/ c 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. N U 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. r'J ;J 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. N V 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. 00 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. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. No d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: IA 172c 5IfE+-p � c ANr--'5C4PE 4. Plants a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other shrubs grass _ pasture _ crop or grain wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other _ other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? i- 0 r-- k./ C w." t-/-petit S c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. /.i c d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: PE �2o s cs� i� i3 lt5 , C 5. Animals a. Circle any birds and animals which have -been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: Ards hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other: ............................. m mmals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: ................................. fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: .................... b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. No r✓4F— c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. No d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: 6. Energy and Natural Resources 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. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. Na 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: 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. NG 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: Al <_ ,AJ b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? jv` ✓ �J 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 cTlo.✓ :tic Z� 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: N 0 Nr 8. Land and Shoreline Use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. /L,/ a c. Describe any structures on the site. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? N o e. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. N o i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? 2C'—`/ z j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: N' 01_/ ( 1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: f E 5 / .:5 / .,--/ -7-1--" $-Ti/D; df= S✓ 2 2 c�•✓i�j �✓� /�ir I��¢ 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. i✓} t p rJ ANC pre/ /_' S / 7- N L W / !; k ! ST! it/ Ll 8 �✓Ew rK E5 OAJ b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: R,5,T-OAJC- &VC)VL.p tzew 6��•-,-e,_g i K a �� o4` d e4 �oss,d4 rtow 1Aq one.z dJ"4e_ .9111r . 10. Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? 2-s J C F 43 4,12- S-i iD, r✓(.y , e_'C3« it 0 2 5Vi'q/<c e—t'v b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: NON 11. Light and Glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? .A✓vtv b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? X/ O c. What existing off -site sources -of light or glare may affect your proposal? A,-, e:,_/� d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: ry /L., t_ 12. Recreation a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. NO c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: nl �ti 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. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. c.. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: A/C, .4V,�� 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. Ace-e—SS 0tJ ,-76 *-7 Fx/Si,,nICl b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? li *7 � 7�6 C. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? /�D i✓Ti.4 c_ .srv/s��tv:slo.'1 oi✓ ,$�y�o�J� A+4��is, ��to/� e%i 4Aft,/a �ho✓i�� d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing ,pro /Z a roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). IQ Q J -0 3 Afxrae� , pgt/,S iP¢.op='%WTr Al.--OSID e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. ti p f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. V-1 �c0 06^✓h g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: A/0Nr 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)? If so, generally describe. No b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. IU C7 nJ i 16. Utilities a. Circle ptilites curre available at the site• electrici efuse service a ephone�s nita atura f er.septic system, o b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the qeneral construction activities on tha site nr in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. A l l tjT / L 1 7 t CS AY> —7 F e /V P/7 o?,L e 7 v f C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead age cy is relying on them to make its decision. Signature:... /:''./. ... .. ......................... Date Submitted:..... . 1/..�J!!2. D. Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions (Rezones, Code Changes, Annexations, etc.) -- 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. 1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise? n/O,v4-5- Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life? /V O A— =- Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: N�nV c 4. How would the proposal be 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, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands? /✓ e rt/ #—= Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: A-1 co N'_ 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? /L/ 0 it/ Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: ti/�>i✓= 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? �4-,7-/E-5 �� ��vt3r3r=ram .4-T L.ar N('Lj Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: ©�(J S'Tf✓cy�,�cw �ppr. �aY F�=� S /��2�n t v2 ; / �S 7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. tV o ,v E AJ O PL �/✓S 0�2 jC-va©IdcSOAJ vn1 PR-�P X s 4-7- -Wf-/s ENVCHK3/PFORMS >r1llp14 .a Vf t C E I V E0 File No. R-4-90 City of Edmonds Planning Department 250 Fifth Avenue North Edmonds, Washington 98020 Dear Sirs: DEC - 7 1990 We wish to thank you for the Notice of Public Nearing on December 12th on the rezone hearing on the following properties: 17510 Olympic View Drive 6815 176th Street S.W. 6831 17th Street S.W. The rezone of these properties to RS-8 would allow at least one additional residence on this land. The traffic on 176th StreetS.W. and Olympic View Drive is already a problem due to the lack of traffic lanes and traffic stop lights. The volume of traffic during peak periods causes problems for those of us living along these streets. The street drainage on Olympic View Driveis primitive and poorly maintained. This is a major concern for those of us living on 66th Ave W. in the City of Lynwood. The drainage ditch is seldom cleaned , causing it to back up and overflow. The intersection of 176th Street S.W. and Olympic View Drive becomes a pond of water. The school children and anyone on the sidewalk must navigate this mess. We welcome new neighbors and progress, but please consider improvements to the traffic anddrainage of the street area before adding to the problem. Additional residences will add to the traffic and water run-off. Sincerely, t�srj2 Thomas A. Reynolds Jr. June L. Reynolds 17520 66th Avenue W. Lynwood, Washington 98037 Tel. 742-6923 ti , I 4i a n Q Q LLJ 0air h- o ..��M.. jj o y-�F--•'—�' —' Jb ■ -)_.. 0 a �% oh Q 00 M FM* w at Vd - ''ld '4159 M m a IT ,h3 a of M ^ LTa o M IN M ��1 b o at a h bi as m w y g a V1.9 n O ram- ^ t3 + 11✓ j h v •ld 41 p ` M 10 'V`ffi�= riSl��aw �-- ~' (96Qa 2t3 7-- g •- _ � O M a �S "o Ob -- w 3Av 4469 —" o __J w nn ld 41s9 O N � `i'i�, '� v Q ° r o Q a V b �— N l b ` I V 'a �• Iq '� . - °" os o I g I— a _� ► Wry _ o Q: a "-- .M -3AV 'PuZL T. j- 3 Z v r SHORT PLAT MAP SECTION TOWNSHIP 27 rA8Ek�a j4-4 Aa ac, SrWZ4T -sw � RANGE 4 /_"•—_- s ` e. r. ----A4f OF pAvBr4m4 --- POWLR P01.4 TEtEPyONE —STORM t8 ---5 • S. MAMHOL4 f—FIRE HYDRANT' fleolkl voolQy AA74 .9125- () ze)MIM4 s R, s. oam 4 7a rAL ARC A; 31, 97¢ / 'Ys ,�rrr • s: Arta ors WESTERN SURVEYORS, INC. 13322 Highway 99 South, Everett,WA 98204 Phones:; 742-5500 or 355-2776 WSIPL26 JOB NO. 5?0 Cl Y OF EDMON46S NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TH Deam&p. 9go FILE NO. k-4-90 LL HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE FOLLOWING APPLICATION: KEZoN6 PQoPERTY Fkd►1 2S•I7w ho R5-8 PROPERTY ADDRESS AND LOCATION i i6 t ® o t t4m om, View Drive.. ve.. 68 3 I 17 6-'tt Si. Iczf ZONE DISTRICT IRS "'M THE HEARING WILL BEGIN AT • -M., IN THE PLAZA MEETING ROOM, LIBRARY BUILDING, 650 MAIN STREET, EDMONDS, WASHINGTON. IF YOU WISH TO COMMENT ON THIS PROPOSAL, YOU MAY COME TO THE HEARING AND SPEAK. YOU MAY ALSO WRITE A LETTER STATING YOUR VIEWS WHICH WILL BE CONSIDERED AT THE HEARING. PLEASE ADDRESS THE LETTER TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND INCLUDE THE ABOVE FILE NUMBER. IF THE ITEM IS CONTINUED TO ANOTHER HEARING BECAUSE THE AGENDA IS NOT COMPLETED, OR FURTHER INFORMATION IS NEEDED, THE DATE OF THE CONTINUED HEARING WILL BE ANNOUNCED ONLY AT THE MEETING. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION MAY BE OBTAINED AT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, 250 FIFTH AVENUE NORTH, EDMONDS (PHONE 771-3202, EXTENSION 252). THE REMOVAL, MUTILATION, DESTRUCTION, OR CONCEALMENT OF THIS NOTICE BEFORE THE DATE WARNING! OF THE HEARING IS A MISDEMEANOR PUNISHABL E BY FINE AND IMPRISONMENT. THIS NOTICE MAY BE REMOVED AFTER /Z-/Z-50 FILE NO. R-4-90 APPLICANT Ken Stevenson NOTICE OF HEARING AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH ) Diane Cunningham being first duly sworn, on oath, deposes and says: That on the 3rd day of December, 1990, the attached Notice of Public Hearing was mailed as required to adjacent property owners, the names of which were provided by the applicant. Signed Subscribed and sworn to before me this \�\P, day of �-e , 199-0 . (Votary PuDiic in ana Tor the State oT wasnington. Residing at MYCOMMISSION EXPTRES: AFIDVTHM/TXTDMC24 95546 Affidavit of Publication STATE OF WASHINGTON, COUNTY OF SN0H01\11ISH, ss hereby notified that -Wednesday, The undersigned, being first duly sworn on oath deposes and says the 14th day of November, 1990, has been set as the date for ng by the Edmonds Near i that she is Principal Clerk of THE HERALD, a daily newspaper Planning Board on a request to rezone property located on the printed and published in the City of Everett, County of Snohomish, northwest corner of the Intersec- Olympice and ierlvRS 12 1ion 76th f StreetSWfrom and State of Washington; that said newspaper is a newspaper of (single Family Residential 12,000 to Family LResidenAreatial a 000 isq.gtf general circulation in said County and State; that said newspaper Lot Area). neazaIlenOo,thPlaMetg Rom has been approved as a legal newspaper by order of the Superior Library Building, 650 Main Street, Edmonds, Washington, Court of Snohomish County and that the notice ........................................ and all interested persons are invited to attend. JACQUELINE G. PARRETT Edmonds City Clerk FileNo. R-4-90 Notice of Public Hearin, File No. R-4-90 /....•. Published: November 4, 1990. ....................................................................... 4 -- ".............................................. ------------------------------....................................................................................-----....... 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: November 4, 1990 ............ ... .............. -- ............ ..._....---------------------- -----------------------------------------. ................•--............ ------------ .. -- .---..... ----.......... .--.....................---............ and that said newspaper was regularly distributed to its subscribers during all of said period. ... r4oh --- Principal Clerk Subscribed and sworn to before me this ............ 5th day of......-- - -- .....November ..., 19..90. ... ........ ................... No Public i and the State of Washington, re ' i g at Everett, Snohomish County. B-2-1 THIS IS A LEGAL ADVLKfISEMENT AND SHOULD BE BILLED 170,7'HE PLANNING DEPARTMENT NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING EDMONDS PLANNING BOARD All interested persons are hereby notified that Wednesday , the 14th day of November , 19 90 , has been set as the date for Hearing by the Edmonds Planning Board on a request to rezone property located on the northwest corner of the intersection of Olympic View Drive and 176th Street SW from RS-12 (Single Family Residential 12,000 sq. ft. Lot Area) to RS-8 (Single Family Residential 8,000 sq. ft. Lot Area). Said Hearing will be at 7:00 p.m. in the Plaza Meeting Room, Library Building, 650 Main Street, Edmonds, Washington, and all interested persons are invited to attend. Jacqueline G. Parrett Edmonds City Clerk File No. R-4-90 Publish 11/4/90 APP 4TION.ROUTING FORM AND CHECKLIST FILE# R-4-90 ROUTED TO: COMMENTS: 0 ENGINEERING 10/3/90 RETURNED FROM: MLBIock INPUT: yes FIRE 10/3/90 RETURNED /y — F — qO PUBLIC WORKS 10/3/90 RETURNED PARKS & REC 10/3/90 RETURNED 40- (-J TAf--A 6 �J+_s RECEIVED C C T 31990 'EDMONDS FIRE DF,�. Owner Kenneth A Stevenson Property Address 17510 Olympic View Drive �► 4.1 q0 Doa 9/27/90 Date of Hearing 0 Return By 10/19/90 Type Rezone property from RS 12 to RS 8 APPLICATION FEE APO LIST TITLE REPORT VICINITY MAP ELEVATIONS (if applicable) PETITION (Ofc. St. Map) Comments: RECEIVED FINDINGS OF FACT ROUTED TO: ENGINEERING FIRE PUBLIC WORKS , PARKS & REC APPEAL # APPEALED BY: HEARING DATE: STAFF HEARING_ HEARING EXAMINER CITY COUNCIL APPEAL UPHELD DENIED SITE PLAN FOR SHORT SUBDIVISION SITE PLAN (11" x 17" (4)) LEGALS(Existing & Proposed) -ENV. ASSESSMENT (if applicable) PROOF OF 3 YEAR OCCUPANCY (ADU) DECLARATIONS (Variance & C.U.P.) ENV. CHECKLIST (if applicable) POST & MAIL (8 1/2" x 11) Date RECEIVED FINDINGS OF FACT CITY COUNCIL AGENDA MAILED FINDINGS OF FACT APPI--ATION.ROUTING FORM AND CHECKLIST FILE# R-4-90 FROM: MLBIock INPUT: yes ROUTED TO: ENGINEERING 10/3/90 RETURNED FIRE 10/3/90 RETURNED PUBLIC WORKS 10/3/90 RETURNED OCT 0 4 iss4 PARKS & REC 10/3/90 RETURNED_ ;4-� COMMENTS: Owner Kenneth A Stevenson Property Address 1751.0 O)ympic View Drive Doa 9/27/90 Date of Hearing 12/12/90 Return By 10/19/90 Type Rezone property from RS 12 to RS 8 APPLICATION FEE APO LIST TITLE REPORT VICINITY MAP ELEVATIONS (if applicable) PETITION (Ofc. St. Map) Comments: RECEIVED FINDINGS OF FACT ROUTED TO: ENGINEERING FIRE PUBLIC WORKS PARKS & REC APPEAL q# APPEALED BY: HEARING DATE: STAFF HEARING HEARING EXAMINER CITY COUNCIL APPEAL UPHELD DENIED SITE PLAN FOR SHORT SUBDIVISION (8 1/2" x 11) SITE PLAN (11" x 17" (4)) LEGALS(Existing & Proposed) "ENV. ASSESSMENT (if applicable) PROOF OF 3 YEAR OCCUPANCY (ADU) DECLARATIONS (Variance & C.U.P.) ENV. CHECKLIST (if applicable) POST & MAIL Date RECEIVED FINDINGS OF FACT CITY COUNCIL AGENDA MAILED FINDINGS OF FACT ACATION.ROUTING FORM AND CHECKL { FILE# R-4-90 ROUTED TO: ENGINEERING 10/3/9Q RETURNED FIRE 10/3/90 RETURNED PUBLIC WORKS 10/3/90 RETURNED PARKS & REC 10/3/90 RETURNED FROM: MLBlock INPUT: yes COMMENTS: 0 c r ;1 Jaya oc r rNriNr� 41990 Owner Kenneth A Stevenson ^Property Address 17510 Olympir view Drive Doa 9/27/90 Date of Hearing 12/12/90 Return By 10/19/90 Type Rezone property from RS 12 to RS 8 ��rw,r�r�r�r,��r�r�r�c�r�r�c�r�r�c�r�r�r�r�r�r�r�r�r�r�r�cx�r�r�r�r�r�r�yryryr�r�r�r�r�r�r�r�r�r�r�c�r�r�r��r��r�r�r�r�rw�r�c�r�c�r�c�r�r�r�r�c�c�r�r,�r�c�c�rxr�c�r�cw�r APPLICATION SITE PLAN FOR SHORT SUBDIVISION (8 1/2" x 11) FEE SITE PLAN (11" x 17" (4)) APO LIST LEGALS(Existing & Proposed) TITLE REPORT -ENV. ASSESSMENT (if applicable) VICINITY MAP PROOF OF 3 YEAR OCCUPANCY (ADU) ELEVATIONS (if applicable) DECLARATIONS (Variance & C.U.P.) PETITION (Ofc. St. Map) ENV. CHECKLIST (if applicable) Comments: RECEIVED FINDINGS OF FACT ROUTED TO: ENGINEERING FIRE PUBLIC WORKS PARKS & REC APPEAL # APPEALED BY: HEARING DATE: STAFF HEARING HEARING EXAMINER CITY COUNCIL APPEAL UPHELD DENIED POST & MAIL Date RECEIVED FINDINGS OF FACT CITY COUNCIL AGENDA MAILED FINDINGS OF FACT APPLICATION.ROUTING FORM AND CHECKLIST FILE# R-4-90 FROM: MLBlock INPUT: yes ROUTED TO: ENGINEERING 10/3/90 RETURNED FIRE 10/3/90 RETURNED ,_-2UBLIC WORKS 10/3/90 RETURNED ARKS & REC 10/3/90 RETURNED COMMENTS ' OCi ��► R E C E V �� WU C��66r, vo PUBLIC WORKS Owner Kenneth A Stevenson Property Address 17510 01,ympir. View Drive Doa 9/27/90 Date of Hearing 12/12/90 Return By 10/19/90 Type Rezone Property from RS 12 to R5 8 APPLICATION FEE APO LIST TITLE REPORT VICINITY MAP ELEVATIONS (if applicable) PETITION (Ofc. St. Map) SITE PLAN FOR SHORT SUBDIVISION (8 1/2" x 11) SITE PLAN (11" x 17" (4) ) LEGALS(Existing & Proposed) .ENV. ASSESSMENT (if applicable) PROOF OF 3 YEAR OCCUPANCY (ADU) DECLARATIONS (Variance & C.U.P.) ENV. CHECKLIST (if applicable) Comments: Yc�►r�r�c�k�ki�r�c�r�k�tr�trw�r�r�r�nrr�k�cyr�r�r�r�r�r�r�ir�k�r�r�ei�r�r�k�Ir�r�Ir�r��k�c�r�r�r�tr�Ir�r�c�c�k�irilr�c�r�k�tc�r�lr�I�r�Ir�rc�r�+c�r�r�r�tr�r�r�r�r�tr�k�r�r�c�r�r�k�r�trYcww�rr RECEIVED FINDINGS OF FACT ROUTED TO: ENGINEERING FIRE PUBLIC WORKS PARKS & REC APPEAL # APPEALED BY: HEARING DATE: STAFF HEARING HEARING EXAMINER CITY COUNCIL APPEAL UPHELD DENIED POST & MAIL Date RECEIVED FINDINGS OF FACT CITY COUNCIL AGENDA MAILED FINDINGS OF FACT 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 "proposal," "proposer," and "affected geographic area." respectively. A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: ��Oq 2. Name of applicant: .J G 1-6� /4 S-t ✓ gr�- S Z9 S f- r S T 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: gID3 '%Z0S W04 J gZo� 4. Date checklist prepared: q/Z5-1 q0 5. Agency requesting checklist: �(J*"OA1/0S Go0--7•11,a1v- T-cf !�E✓ r7l�r+'I��/T 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): 2 Z-za v ,, , C— 11 s t�2T Pi- A T1 ^.10 IS"*S'4=- S 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. 3 L-o T 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. ^% o ti! z 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. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. N0NC 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the 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. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.) 12 I=zo nJ ;F 7-0 <5Fpoo `r;o 'A L-L-01,, FZ:D rZ 3 t,. ar sA-0fe-7 i J-A7- Page 5, November 5 - 9, 1990 DATE DATE *** END **** DOC TYPE CH* LEAD AGENCY ** PROPOSAL ISSUED MAILED REVIEW ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- DNS 5 City of Poulsbo Cut and move 10,225 cu yds of soil to prepare site for future 11/07/90 11/26/90 commercial development, near Dogfish Creek, 19917 State Hwy 305 (Gary Lindsey) 5 Kitsap County Log 12 of 20 acres, property will be divide in the future, W 11/01/90 11/05/90 11/17/90 side of Cox Rd NW, 350 ft S of Hallmann Rd NW (Thomas Tate) 5 Kitsap County Castalla, divide 43.9 acres into 22 single family lots with 11/06/90 11/21/90 septic systems, wetlands on -site, N side of New Brooklyn Rd, between Sands Rd NE and Sportsmen Club Rd, 1 mile N of Winslow, Bainbridge Island (Rob Gilmer) 5 Kitsap County Construct a 154 ft long rock bulkhead on the Puget Sound for a 11/06/90 11/21/90 single family residence, 1710 Beans, Bight Rd NE, SE Bainbridge Island (Edgar Kirsopp) 6 City of Edmonds Rezone property from RS-12 to RS-8 and divide into 3 single 11/05/90 family lots, 17510 Olympic View Dr (Kenneth A Stevenson) 6 City of Edmonds Construct a reinforced masonry wall to retain existing grade, 11/06/90 1234 Viewland Way (Eric Partch) 6 City of Everett (Addendum) Extend the effective date of the Interim Traffic 11/02/90 Mitigation policy to December 31, 1991, requires traffic analyses for development proposals which exceed specific thresholds, city-wide 6 City of Everett Construct 2 miles of new 36 inch concrete pipes to supplement 11/02/90 11/18/90 the Alderwood Water District's existing system, from Spring St to 3rd Ave (Alderwood Water District) 6 City of Stanwood Construct 2 mini -storage bldgs and use 3,000 cu yds of fill, 11/08/90 11/26/90 8501 Cedarhome Dr NW (Norm Harrington and Stan Starkenburg) 6 Snohomish County Construct an 11,088 sq ft structure with underground parking, 10/29/90 11/14/90 11,200 sq ft of additional outdoor parking, demolish a single family residence, 12315 Mukilteo Speedway, Lynnwood (George Bowls) 6 Snohomish County Construct a single family residence, 18418 Home View Dr (Tom 10/30/90 11/14/90 Belt) 6 Snohomish County Excavate 2,080 cu yds of earth from a drainage ditch and pond, S 10/30/90 11/14/90 end of 15th Ave HE (Alan Frost) 6 Snohomish County Construct a 4,684 sq ft single family residence with a 500 sq ft 11/06/90 11/21/90 deck and a 1,050 sq ft garage, 6815 - 147th St SW, Edmonds (James M Rozanski) 7 City of Auburn Fill and grade 6.52 acres with 30,000 cu yds of material, 11/04/90 11/19/90 wetlands on -site, 100 block of 16th St NE/NW (Stephen Lone) 7 City of Auburn Fill and grade 12 acres and construct a 221,760 sq ft 11/04/90 11/19/90 dock -height warehouse with interior office space, wetlands on -site, 2900 W Valley Hwy N (H R P Properties) 7 City of Auburn Fill and grade 9.9 acres and construct a 201,600 sq ft 11/04/90 11/19/90 dock -height warehouse with interior office spaces, 500 block of `C' St NW (HRP Properties) 7 City of Auburn (Reissued) Rezone from Single Family Residential to Central 11/05/90 Business District to allow more intensive use of the property as a dental laboratory to serve the needs of the adjacent dental office, 114 `D' St SE (Roger D Sohn) 7 City of Auburn Mountain View Cemetery, develop 1 acre into 900 adult graves, 11/08/90 11/28/90 400 cremation plots, a 300-niche columbarium and 15,000 sq ft of asphalt roadway, 2020 Mountain View Dr Page 6, November 5 - 9, 1990 DATE DATE *** END **** DOC TYPE CH* LEAD AGENCY ** ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- PROPOSAL ISSUED MAILED REVIEW DNS 7 City of Bellevue Northup Apartments, construct a 20 unit multifamily complex in 11/06/90 11/21/90 3 bldgs, construct a single family residence on 1.026 acres, 16255, 16227, 16229 and 16217 Northup Way (Richard F Donovan) 7 City of Bellevue Summitridge, divide 27.39 acres into 62 single family lots, 11/06/90 11/21/90 demolish 2 existing single family residences, stream and wetland on -site, 6523 Lakemont Blvd SE (Kemeth Longfellow) 7 City of Kent Remove 2 underground fuel tanks and replace with two 10,000 11/02/90 11/17/90 gallon tanks, 711 N Central St (T 8 S Mini -Mart) 7 City of Kent Construct a 100 ft cellular telephone pole with cellular 11/02/90 11/17/90 equipment on top and a 336 sq ft electronic equipment vault, wetlands adjacent to site, 921 Central Ave (Interstate Mobilephone Co) 7 City of Redmond Divide 2.04 acres into 8 single family lots, wetlands on -site, E 11/01/90 11/16/90 of Redmond-Woodinvilte Rd, at NE 106th St (Columbia Brokerage) 7 City of Seattle Replace 3 underground fuel storage tanks with three 12,000 11/05/90 11/20/90 gallon tanks, remodel existing service station, 3720 California Ave SW (Chevron USA) 7 Kent School Kent -Meridian High School Auditorium/Student Center Remodel, 10/26/90 11/02/90 11/09/90 District No. 415 remodel the existing student center into a student center/auditorium with 350 fixed seats, 100020 SE 256th St 7 King County Lea Hill Apartments, construct a 313 unit apartment complex on 11/06/90 11/21/90 15.72 acres, 215 ft E of NE corner of 124th Ave SE and SE 312th St, NE of Auburn (Essex House) 7 King County Greenbrier Estates, divide 31 acres into 29 single family lots, 11/06/90 11/21/90 near Lake Sawyer, between 232nd and 237th Ave SE and between SE 292nd and 296th, N of Black Diamond (Novastar Enterprises Inc) 7 King County Lea Creste Apartments, Phase 11, construct a 90 unit apartment 11/06/90 11/21/90 complex on 4.8 acres, 31005 - 124th Ave SE, E of Auburn (Coastal Pacific Development Inc) 7 King County Beaver Lake Park, develop an 83 acre park with picnicking area, 11/06/90 11/21/90 overnight cabins and lodges, 3 softball fields, 2 tennis courts, woods and wetlands on -site, between Beaver Lake and 244th Ave SE, between SE 24th and SE 28th Streets, N of Issaquah 7 King County Lee's Texaco, replace tanks and lines, construct a new canopy 11/06/90 11/21/90 and small store on 0.43 acres, 5804 - 119th Ave SE, E of Bellevue (Harold Lee James) 7 King County Lea Crest Apartments, construct a 131 unit apartment complex in 11/06/90 11/21/90 two, 3-story bldgs on 1.15 acres, 12300 SE 312th, HE of Auburn (Robert Wells and Assoc) 7 King County Juanita Creek Regional Flow Control Facilities, construct a 30 11/08/90 11/26/90 acre-ft regional stormwater detention pond on Juanita Creek in the High Woodlands ravine, at the Juanita Creek crossing of I-405, near NE 145th St 7 King County Grade 900 cu yds of fill on 2 acres, wetlands on -site, 1026 - 11/13/90 11/28/90 250th Ave NE, Redmond (Stuart Anderson) 7 King County WA Mutual Bank Pine Lake Village, construct a 4,500 sq ft bank 11/13/90 11/28/90 with 2 drive -up lanes on a 0.5 acre site, 3012 Issaquah -Pine Lake Rd, N of Issaquah (The Callison Partnership) 7 King County Legalize an existing illegal fill of 2,100 cu yds for Lot 11/13/90 11/28/90 improvements and landscaping on two, 15,000 sq ft lots, 12219 and 12221 - 14th Ave S, SE of Seattle (Roth and Malcolm) 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. Fx44"'sr -Ipa-D--n f4_i==4V' ' 'q v , Pave &NT b. Are there any off -site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. N© c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: nl 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. NONE 4 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. 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. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. ^10 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. � V 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. /.ic' 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. N'O 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. ME 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. P V-c- L' CT y � � VA faE , v► A!�A/7'5 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. No d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: f4Yy7t2e Vc=aFp L-ANnSc4PJ= 4. Plants a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other shrubs grass _ pasture crop or grain _ wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other _ water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Soerr r2cis `7-,) 13er 2 ova= vPoti% �--Vc.r47-'o1J V 7-- ti/ 1� „-J t4o ---t c-S c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. N0 d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: t 0 4-5 t c- fr / r--1n 5 4PC 5. Animals a. Circle any birds and animals which have -been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: irds hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other: ............................. m murals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: ................................. fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: .................... b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. tau r✓i=— c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. No d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: NOA-1E 6. Energy and Natural Resources 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. 574- r-7GTF� (G L- t H Of i l Av Y 1 C-, �s lam.¢--- b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No 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: 11 1(-o ENraR t7Y Gsio 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. NQ 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. N� N C: 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: Meese= b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? No 11 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. P 4-5Y G vcJ U c- Y 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: t6_1 0NS 8. Land and Shoreline Use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? StAltyLC F-T—!C-y t-1-0t-1E=-�S b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. /l% o c. Describe any structures on the site. / 6,i1✓4LC )-f--I iL.V 14b d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? N d e. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. " O i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? 9-i2 j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? N0 n/ 6 k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: NvtjE 1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: 4;""rvvy Af= S�e22p,�iJi,vye� CO --w pe-jEFTXio f3E%�2 2cr�v� s T c�2 CZoN/✓ 9. Housing , a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. N) I D t' C macro n/ F Jl,::,''"r C S 2 N E v✓ 1 x/ S T/ N Gr b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. N o /-1 = c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: /N 0 ^f E 10'. Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? 2—T / C is b4.#Z- S-i A i r✓G1 , A ore b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: NVNF 11. Light and Glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would itmainly occur? N�w>� b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? A/ o c. What existing off -site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? A✓CA.vF d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: N & tit, 12. Recreation a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? C- PfF e- fC b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. iV o c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: Al aiv C 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. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. N®n/0 c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: n/G r/C 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-55 c) (-7(0 *-t AE Xc/ 5T"Ny b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? Q 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). N42 e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. N O f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: A/0Av' 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)? If so, generally describe. NO b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. 16. Utilities a. Circle iLtE.ities currgatly available at the site ele tura efuse serv�c a ephon ni ary sewe septic system, ofTier. b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. ,A l l O-ri L i T( ES A-o E G O i✓ P12 o jPEiC 7 Y C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead age cy is relying on them to make its decision. Signature:... ... :�;..... Date Submitted:.....4.74'*2.................................... D. Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions (Rezones, Code Changes, Annexations, etc.) -- 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. 1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise? Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: A./oovE 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life? /voA-'iE Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: iLe - G A'r- `'4 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? /voN� Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: No /N 'i� 4. Now would the proposal be 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, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands? /✓ 6 rV4—;: Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: 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? fit./ © N Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: ,cam 0 A/ -0- 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? _/ No --C— P14 0- T / 4 S C17-r i- i Tr CS' �A*-7 45- S-rL-) a t4-i" Cro T L r NC Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: r�4 --ql, gEtp Fdt?- vsi5 of v7-�t, F-! �� 1. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. PC) IVE. ENVCHK3/PFORMS 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 the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a 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. TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. Earth a. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other j< /Z. rL147 /Z S/--0�-F b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? 2 0 v/O c. 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. 0 (/ I- a ' L O f > I— d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. N O e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. 0't 4 F'-9— -r A *l-,o E:j-- c i4vo14Tto n) a 1- TO b i✓S f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. N� g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? '70 0 0 4 M h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: 9yO✓2 0 S'�4�,o city of edmonr'� - land use application WF ❑ ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD ❑ COMP PLAN CHANGE ❑ CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ❑ FORMAL SUBDIVISION ❑ HOME OCCUPATION ❑ LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT ❑ OFFICIAL STREET MAP AMEND ❑ PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOP. REZONE ❑ SETBACK ADJUSTMENT ❑ SHORELINE PERMIT ❑ SHORT SUBDIVISION ❑ STREET VACATION ❑ VARIANCE ❑ RESUBMITTAL FILE # FILE #F Ef `'IV ZONE RL ` / — DATE ?' Z7` REC'D BY Py FEE c REC IPT # HEARING DATEZA 4 4O ❑ HE ❑ STAFF )d PB ❑ ADB ❑ CC ACTION TAKEN: ❑ APPROVED ❑ DENIED ❑ APPEALED APPEAL # Applicant �1n/NET"!� �Tc✓�✓S'ani Phone _6-77- —6'17;zI Address S 1/ O 3 7-Z "� �-i/ v✓ I�r1�toNGZS Wig . ?eeO 2 Property Address or Location /7-S7© 01 "1>1C vigil,✓ D2,,SCE Property Owner 7-H /4 �7'�✓�/�,.✓ Phone 6-74 Address M 23 -22-v9 vv- X:�P� /)yL O A/S 4✓4 d I8 7-z'G Agent 6 h Phone Nk Add Tax Acc # Legal Description SEJ-5 Sec. Twp. Rng. Details of Project or Proposed Use o t--A 2 /7-.f odo 4 The undersigned applicant and his/her/its heirs, and assigns, in co ideration of the processing of the application agrees to release, indemnify, defend and hold the City of Edmonds Tarmless 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 Participants in rezone from r12,000 to r8,000 5131-000-145-0304 6815 176th sw Seattle First National Bank Edmonds WA Bagdon E F 088677-0 P 0 Box c34103 Seattle WA. 98124 6 Signatures----6 � � -; r. -------------- ----- --------- Aj 5131-000-145-0908 Davis Robert M 6831 176th sw Edmonds WA 98020 Signatures--1�[2) -- ----------------------------------- -RbZ-F /h--OAVI S -----4BI----------------------------- A-�7-� ,� Pam,_ �-" CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY A.L.TA. COMMITMENT SCHEDULE A Order No.: 200122 Your No.: (Continued) LEGAL DESCRIPTION ALL THAT PORTION OF TRACTS 145 AND 146 AND OF VACATED 68TH STREET ADJACENT TO VOLUME 5 SAID TRACTS, MEADO OMISHBCOUNTYAS PER PLAT RECORDED WASHINGTON, DESCRIBEDNAS FOLLOWS F PLATS, PAGE(S) 38, RECORDS OF BEGINNING AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE WESTERLY LINE OF EDMONDS-BEVERLY PARK ROAD AND THE NORTH LINE OF 176TH STREET SOUTHWEST; THENCE SOUTH 89057'WEST 85LONG FEETTHE WEST OFHTHENE OF EAST LINEHOFTREET SAID TRACTWEST 145;FOR 97,1 FEET TO A POINT THATIS THENCE NORTH 0047' EAST 240 FEET; ET TO THE WESTERLY LINE OF EDMONDS-BEVERLY PARK THENCE NORTH 89057 EAST 180.43 FE ROAD; THENCE SOUTH 21049' WEST ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE 255.41 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT O BEGINNING. SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH, STATE OF WASHINGTON. uq .. t I oe ry ry w w�1 N ��.7 v� w ac, O - ¢J 1) r r CCLI � .._ I iI I w JO Q JF-QIF" J1�- RX IT o cl �§ r M I § U >r.$ K, (a woF Kor r xg "cc M G ym (L a� '� I" i Io �i L� m j M Q Io I+� I 1 w01 M 3 Z aWz M O o M >m� O W � M K Q O J M �a ���i r d I I I 1 � r J K z a .- via U � > maW '- n iF Q II�m 0�y � iq IZ iil F- ILA OJ L�J O P 1 I- I r- O N W z p� d M d O 1� O J OPT ; Ol m O 1 1 I Qa i i o 0 zi o I I W j £ 1 N MIn I w ZZ-I I O R M o i N J 1 I 1 I> I I \ \ O \ O F- u I F- F LL H aL I I I w r LL 1 LLj O I N N F- 0 Z 1 I V 1 I O '• v O I 1 n O, v) t~W i O I I O \ �-+LLn M3 p r4in WZ W S3 �L QZZ LHJ�+nO U n23 N O �Z U a 1 I Kn\N e-m n W F-O <v) WF-VK O 1 I 1 1 w a v1 Hn MYZZI- JW 1- F-0 N1- (nn 3Jw Jn/-nwz< OYfn 1 n I I 1 I Y O K v\v) v2 �S 3w e8 WF nQ WJJ ZZ2 OHS J n N31-I 1--0 WKy JJ3Y m J z(n 2N n K !1 N I I x > \F- OZ O n>mmJO S H X F- 4. "1 1 1 1 F- N >- K O •-J f� H F� H� F- J N>a U230/-IJOWH F- O " U O W F- Z M I wF- LL I�✓pLO 2� K� i-W JK ��W O f� £ 1 1 cc cc ua v\ �� �O~ EK uU nZ~OZnONIa-Wry R ' O I ij �� a\ �n F- F- n >OF-JNNI-2 K3 N O S 1 I 1 1 >U v7 M O K vU K W N \ ON JNQ >F- nOZn F-Oa F- LL 1 I W O F- F J �� JP�� F-J> O OvJ O1 O Z 1 I 1 I I+1G 2 U> ao z F- KZ WHnnu a Gm mu > --\ >e- WM Zw OLL OQn.r V 3ZnZZ Jw >N O� 0E- O ZS F- LL /f O 2 �v) N w H K S 2 2 e- n In 'm N I I ILQ 2 U W NWL>J _j C.3 US KUQ F-ZWJ U h I f� O O w 6 1 MJ m n JQ LL3LL\ JF-tzg' 4l uK W F-On n Z 3N1� w M F-F- d J m 3 1 L >0 0r- H m N1 MWNOF- LLS F- > 3<oxLL- mM3 CL I �w WM W WM nLL epJ W e- W JZL V1WS JZF-O F- wRW f� L!1 zo J M J In OV' Q J d n 3 OM J V/ WQ G W O` Q JS PI) I.- V\ ..pp 2 On J'- 4 J d O 3 d0 Q KN OHO JUMZ�F- J JKF-LLI>_KZv) d OqF- W > of J of JGO q n 3 F- WF- JN nOn .p SON YU K On U 3 S O 1i. O IIny 00 n O Z -R t-w F- f-HWVW3 w K ¢YLL F-Jp M UJJWF- JJ2fn CYO J W O p W MS WLL W d BOLL Ko W H X r Ou N £ wJ U3 Z W0 ZInOnOa LmnNUF-d F-in 233E-w Xco £mw � a o 0 0 0 r� 1 I F N I J ao v) pn aD n O n N it 1 II O, 12 P I £ n IT P N m d1 � d r Ojj{ a OUP K In pL JI-� piQ O "`�M o `r`~OO ' �• cc W �OZMO �Jaj, �>wRl ,}1�{j,-OX J�Ou3 I M p O mQ7mJ XZ mIJ- ZXw JOmH M M M 1 Q i J Q L!� 111 M v O� sai� n L> O¢ QtgJn V ir�v,maln u Ii InU L� 1 O LA O M LA p o O M a — LA Ij 8 S a �r O I UZ I HM ti � y W 50 f O 6 1 3 g to �Z p/ O Z Q — 0 80 � \ 65 DALEcr . 5 Q 60 2 S� Pam- o z 3 10 12 0 4 a C) OWN N� Ppp . 6 S U I H o W > ?JlN 5 �' m 126 a 3 o Q cp w - m O = 3 Z ao 5 2 m 16J 2 O o o �' , 40 15 S-21-76 5' ( S-37-74 5• 1 5' PER PLAT 50 8 14 60 Q I 01 2 a 172 ND NOT ST_ - PEN S.W. \\ � 1 F < WOODLAN 1 D , 12 \ Z 45 J d 0 13 5 W d eo 172 N p o 4✓' . 14 ESTAFES N0. 2 /0. A B 45 " y so 28 1 9 144 _ O bo ' 173RD * �, .W PL S. o \ ° 20 I S T. S VU 10 g 0 KM N 6 U)5 w S-1-78 0 DAL P RK 5 Q 4 VALLEY \ 3 NGE 52,7 3w P �D W ALE D TESTS 145 W ,�s ry -- A D 2 = so o C �e B CKE I J 1 60 so a. 1 — _ L 50 S.- 9-6 i3s g 17 ) 2 1 S. W. a o j� g ; - 10 f 7154. W.. NOV ;_6 r LEGAL DESCRIPTION - K. A STEVENSON PERMIT COUNTER JOB NO. 90-146-A NOVEMBER, 1990 L486 LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF REZONE AREA R-4-90 - CITY OF EDMONDS NORTHWEST OF INTERSECTION OF OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE AND 176TH ST. S.W. TOTAL PARCEL: ALL THAT PORTION OF TRACTS 145 AND 146, MEADOWDALE BEACH AND OF VACATED 68TH STREET ADJACENT TO SAID TRACTS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE WESTERLY LINE OF EDMONDS- BEVERLY PARK ROAD (OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE) AND THE NORTH LINE OF 176TH STREET SOUTHWEST; THENCE SOUTH 89057' WEST ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF 176TH STREET SOUTHWEST FOR 97.1 FEET TO A POINT THAT IS 85 FEET WEST FROM THE EAST LINE OF SAID TRACT 145; THENCE NORTH 0047' EAST 240 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89057' EAST 180.43 FEET TO THE WESTERLY LINE OF EDMONDS-BEVERLY PARK ROAD; THENCE SOUTH 210490 WEST ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE 255.41 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, AS PER PLAT RECORDED IN VOLUME 5 OF PLATS ON PAGE 38, RECORDS OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY. SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH, STATE OF WASHINGTON. TOGETHER WITH THE SOUTH 303.00 FEET OF THE EAST 148.00 FEET OF THE WEST 428.00 FEET OF SAID TRACT 145; TOGETHER WITH THE EAST 147.00 FEET OF THE WEST 575.00 FEET OF THE SOUTH 303.00 FEET OF SAID TRACT 145. SUBJECT TO ALL EASEMENTS, RESTRICTIONS AND RESERVATIONS. SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH, STATE OF WASHINGTON. L486 90-146-A 112790 DJA i1-Z7-90 PAGE 1 OF 1 LEGAL DESCRIPTION - K. A STEVENSON JOB NO. 90-146-A NOVEMBER, 1990 L486 LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF REZONE AREA R-4-90 - CITY OF EDMONDS NORTHWEST OF INTERSECTION OF OLYMPIC VIEW.DRIVE AND 176TH ST. S.W. TOTAL PARCEL: ALL THAT PORTION OF TRACTS 145 AND 146, MEADOWDALE BEACH AND OF VACATED 68TH STREET ADJACENT TO SAID TRACTS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE WESTERLY LINE OF EDMONDS- BEVERLY PARK ROAD (OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE) AND THE NORTH LINE OF 176TH STREET SOUTHWEST; THENCE SOUTH 89057' WEST ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF 176TH STREET SOUTHWEST FOR 97.1 FEET TO A POINT THAT IS 85 FEET WEST FROM THE EAST LINE OF SAID TRACT 145; THENCE NORTH 0047' EAST 240 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89057' EAST 180.43 FEET TO THE WESTERLY LINE OF EDMONDS-BEVERLY PARK ROAD; THENCE SOUTH 21049' WEST ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE 255.41 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, AS PER PLAT RECORDED IN VOLUME 5 OF PLATS ON PAGE 38, RECORDS OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY. SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF'SNOHOMISH, STATE OF WASHINGTON. TOGETHER WITH THE SOUTH 303.00 FEET OF THE EAST 148.00 FEET OF THE WEST 428.00 FEET OF SAID TRACT 145; TOGETHER WITH THE EAST 147.00 FEET OF THE WEST 575.00 FEET OF THE SOUTH 303.00 FEET OF SAID TRACT 145. SUBJECT TO ALL EASEMENTS, RESTRICTIONS AND RESERVATIONS. SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH, STATE OF WASHINGTON. 11 - 27 -90 L486 90-146-A 112790 DJA PAGE 1 OF 1 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS LIST On my oath, I certify that the names and addresses provided represent all properties located within 80 feet of the subject property. Signature of Applicant or Applicant's Representative Subscribed and sworn to before me thi��&dy of 199"1 . Notary Public in and for t,�F State of Washington Residing at 6(j — MY COMMISSION EXPIRES 3-193 6: 5131-000-145-0908 Davis, Robert M. 6831 176th SW Edmonds, WA 98020 5967-000-001-0009 Commonwealth Mtg. Co. Mason, Darrel 4083560 2200 W. Loop South Houston, Texas 77027 7571-000-001-0063 Lomas Mtg. USA t Jacoby, John PO Box 660722 Dallas, Texas �75-,2& 6874-000-014-0004 US Bancorp Mtg. Co. Latchall, Carl 1604642 PO Box 3347 Portland, OR 97208 6874-000-015-5003 Reynolds, Thomas A Jr. 17520 66th Ave W. Lynnwoos, WA 98037 6874-000-016-0002 Pioneer Bank Akerlund, Lyle W 159947 4111 200th SW Lynnwood, WA 98036 6541-000-010-0001 Miller, George W 6820 176th St SW Emonds, WA 98020 17604 Olympic View Drive Edmonds, WA 98020 17610 67th PI W Edmwds,WA L MAIW a SIM0 7 17512 66th Ave W. Eon* LYNnllioaia 98020 r1. 6-17 ra 5131 -000-145-0205 Family Savings & Loan Gavrilovich Bogdan Af/3s 91-501569 PO Box 989881 Seattle, WA �W4' 5131-000-145-0809 U.S. Bancorp Mtg. Co. Wise, Howard J 9248830 P.O. Box 3347 Portland, OR 9T�cJ g 51 31-000-145-1005 Pioneer Bank Gal6gher, Lewis W. 02-52001433 4111 200th SW Lynnwood, WA 98036 5131-000-145-1401 Pioneer Bank Carroll, W.E. 02-52000941 4111 200th SW Lynnwood, WA 98036 5131 -000-1 45-1500 Ayers, Mel G 17505 69th PI W. Edmonds, WA 98020 5131-000-145-1609 Conner, Edward 17501 69th PI W Edmonds, WA 98020 5131-000-145-1807 Talley, Marvin K 20720 Crawford Road Lynnwood, WA 98036 5131 -000 -145-2003 Hummel, Irvin D 6828 174th Street Sw Edmonds, WA 98020 6906 174th PI SW Edmonds, WA 98020 6917 176th St SWf Edmonds, WA 98020 6802 174th St SW Edmonds, WA 98020 / 57,/3 `l &-9e* 51 31 -000-1 45-0304 Seattle First Nat. Bank Bagdon E.F. PO Box C34103 86770 roes _ Is' i 1(.rc�l L � Seattle, WA 98124 R-4-90 N Kenneth A. Stevenson/Resident 18403 72nd Ave. W. Edmonds, WA 98026 Darrel Mason/Resident 17604 Olympic View Drive Edmonds, WA 98026 US Bancorp Mtg. Co. Latchall, Carl 1604642 P.O. Box 3347 Portland, OR 97208 PioYe Akele W 159947 411W Family Savings & Loan Gavrilovich Bogdan 91-501569 P.O. Box 15135 Seattle, WA 98115 Howard J Wise/Resident 6917 176th St. S.W. Edmonds, WA 98020 Pioneer Bank Carroll, WE 02-52000941 4111 200th SW Lynnwood, WA 98036 Edward Conner/Resident 17501 69th P1. W. Edmonds, WA 98020 Robert M. Davis/Resident 6831 176th SW Edmonds, WA 98026 Lomas Mtg., USA Jacoby John P.O. Box 660722 Dallas, TX 75266 Carl Latchall/Resident 17512 66th Ave. W. Lynnwood, WA 98037 Lyle W. Akerlund/Resident 17526 66th Ave. W. Lynnwood, WA 98037 Bogdan Gavrilovich/Resident 6906 174th P1. S.W. Edmonds, WA 98026 Pioneer Bank Gallagher, Lewis W 02-52001433 4111 200th SW Lynnwood, WA 98036 Carroll/Resident 17439 69th P1. W. Edmonds, WA 98020 Marvin K Talley/Resident 20720 Crawford Road Lynnwood, WA 98036 Commonwealth Mtg. Co. Mason, Darrel 4083560 2200 W. Loop South Houston, TX 77027 John Jacoby/Resident 17610 67th Pl. W. Edmonds, WA 98026 Thomas A. Reynolds Jr./Reside 17520 66th Ave. W. Lynnwood, WA 98037 George W Miller/Resident 6820 176th SW Edmonds, WA 98026 US Bancorp Mtg. Co. Wise, Howard J 9248830 P.O. Box 3347 Portland, OR 97208 Lewis W Gallagher/Resident 6802 174th St. S.W. Edmonds, WA 98020 Mel G. Ayers/Resident 17505 69th P1. W. Edmonds, WA 98020 Irvin D Hummel/Resident 6828 174th St. S.W. Edmonds, WA 98020 Seattle First Nat. Bank E.F. Bagdon/Resident Western Surveyors, Inc. Bagdon E F 0886770 6815 176th SW 13000 Highway 99 S P.O. Box C34103 Edmonds, WA 98020 Everett, WA 98204 Seattle, WA 98124