Loading...
V-67-1977.pdf/�Po v CITY OF ED"0"iDS BOARD 0- APPLICATION Mtn I VA"ANCE t FILE�(�__� ? 1 DATE a FEE 525.00 P,EC' T HEARING DATE: APPLIC,A:1T: 'Nlh4 Clydo 'Di-mmick ADDRESS 213 -1r; St., :,Idrionds, `NA PHONE: 778-7672 � Indicate type or degree of interest in the property: Own rise a_na Clear 0'.11 1 E R Sa-min ADDRESS : � Sa,�c PHONE : Sw LOCAT IM OF PROPERTY (.ADDRESS) 21 , LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY: SY�st 96 ft. of Last 195 rt. of Lot 10, Elk. 003 D-02 South Park Addition to daonds . _ LEGAL DESCRIPTION CHET: ED 2+ APPROVED USE Z0:'E: I 6000 By Planning Department ZONING ORDL;A;,CE RLQ6 R}E_ IZlT: ns 60oo .-• � 4 � i==�F _� �u-�.,E, . Z, VARIANCE REQUESTED: To ;lave corn,:r of a douoie= Cas' r{ara�4c to extend 9-112 ft. fron rr:,s= L structurc into setback from- Ll Strciet, ptr plot -lI n alta c1ied. t o� \ C' STATEMENT OF CONDITIONS AFIJ REASONS FOR REQUEST. 1N ACCORDANCE WITH STANDARDS AFJD CRITERIA � ATTACHED: ;;o .ja,ye liv6 it taus no�o for 21 ycars. and at 1,11c tinct t'ne house wi�3 built-- 23 ui t_23 vEvars ar-o, it tivas' not in the cit;' of _d ot;gs . and until tno Stat v;_, ve i.____ _y v ia_ ; -ot ,a nu? uut in Curbq .11,6 3 icewa IkS f ow V `22'5 cr0 it i7dS of ilttli3 uhf a 12 ft. 'erZde di -rt road. iuildr did not ,;,-t th:Louse back 25 it. as (Cont) _ Over STATE OF W\SHIiJGTON } ss._ Signature o, Applicant, Owner or !,epresentative S COWTY OF .0H9:11SH) On this date, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for the. State of Washincton, Ally COMMIiSS40ned and S1JOrn, pet'sonally anpeai,ed 11,1 �(�L E - �t. /. >WI10, being duly s':Joi'n, on oa`,'l d2pnces and says that (she ')aS and read t,,(' Xm,o. going StatEf"nts and has, aC):n0,l1Cd ed to re 11 f� le rnCl tatinns Contained and 'lam 1):C(' f-:,, -is 1nS r ,tent as i %11Urand vOluntary act and deed for file purposes therein t,entioned. Subscribed and sti.xo i to before r,:e this_ E ° day of residing at ' Notary 'ublic in and for the State of :Jashington. E ALLEGATIONS OF APPLICANT- POINT t The following are the special circuinstances which .:ply to my property which dept -P.- me of rights and privileges which are enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity ender the identical zone classification. years a_ o, IT, - „ct. z tf: city of Ecir�oncis, and tie builder did ;sck it. as re,,t._r6:d by Eclslonds Code. It Was a n Emory, little tj°aysl d ciirt road pwt in oy G build• r. He also put an a small carport inatead of viltic-I w• would now like to build. POINT 2. The variance i am request " l,ji•.jI not be detri,!ntal to the public wel- fare or injurious to the r-,ropertie, improvements in the vicinity of a zone in v,,hich my L. i ty is located because. Tie zso„l,d have az, ar ckit�et or d sl n'_;r play . our additJ on, aiid we would like it designed at an ar,gle fro.. our ho:A0, ae Pre feel zt °roul :: far nor€. attractive that way, and increase c te: esthetic. value., alid be _. >ir ; vitA tht, type o;: ho -L_n t will ev=.tuaily be built acrpSs ".. rusk. Vie also a'i--i scpasata lot to t ,e 6e'st of.,t:"is s,, - . POINT 3. if this variance is not granted„ an unnecessary hardsht continue to the owner of this property, the cause of �•rhich is beyond his contrul because: W e _ e 0 d :closed storax CY a•,�: erg :4y nut x nets (=r'nic Hour is tools, n :-ust De outside, or in tie carp -Ort ge3ttlnv act :r-Jorated fro' -::i san and weather. " s`ic also ,could likea plAco to �_,eu one; =;,ori: of o.Lr cars offtnc street, plug a work area, where my husband cr.n work on his nets, even in bad weather. A � POINT t`t. -;o as not to grant a special privilege to me by the granting of this variance I submit the following conditions to he imposed so as not to cause in- consistencies ".pith the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in �-rhich 1 elm located. Si _-o we • he ozv ncru_, facing alar, . tr,:, . in t;ii� block, a -Iia t t}vo spouses in; ..loser to t,h(atrret t iarn Code, i do not foes ;illy ccnditiol�s benpose-6, sir:c.<_ t)- is AwAticn. shoulc. 1.. ,,,-ra ,_ a— r •• t— ---- i ---------------- ®'b i' i s s Record of F ­kings of Fact by Board of lldjuc,`Iment The Board of Adjustment for the City of Edmonds finds in the case of _ Y File No. �, . keques t for variance at following. That notice was given according to Code requirements, and /Affidavits attesting to same are in the file. Tfiat the foregoing set forth Statda*rdsand Criteria each have/ -have nvt been met. In addition thereto, Therefore, the request for variance is /Granted, subject to the following special conditions: S. Section 12. 16.110 "----and if a bui i chi r.g. perms t and/or occupancy i2rmi t is not obtained for the subject property within one year from the date of the Board's decision, the con- ditional use permit or variance shall be automatically null and void.---" Decision shall be effective on:(Jf,,,_, l ' Date+ fU , DATED: 7 7-- Chai man, Board of /ldju gment DATA W Date of [,ppl i cation: 7 Date of Ileari ng: i Date of PuLlication: /(' J{` �- Continuances: of Posting: i I [)ate; t?` , l)naI frocr Dr—,— iorr of Clic Coard: �recretar Aboard of /1du5tuent J i 1 r 6 as a 'ILA ti to V-(P� -�I rt , V-(P� -�I M0TICE OF HEAkIHG PETITT(%i FOR YAKIA�CE.- . ` All interested persons are hereby notified that Wednesday, the 30th day nf ^`117»vembez l977 , has been set as the � date for hearing Cl e Dironick petition filcd by —Cly6e for a variance of II ' from required 20' front Yard setback - ot 213 Elm Street ^ � said property being zoned IlS,h � ' Said hearing will be /t 7:30 P.N.'.�n the -Council Chambers of the Civic Center, Edmonds, Hashiogto�bofo` Lbe Board of Adjustmcnt and all interested persons are in^ited to appear. �. '. IREUE V8RUEY NOR8% City Clerk, City of Edmonds V7 FlL[ AO� ' -7 PD8L[�H� II -77 1 FILE PLA"�NER`S Vv AR AiICE REVIE'J FN,'l APPLICANT C ADD�,ESS: ZONING: VARIXWE RE D: -- __ ZOIIM,C1 CODE REQ _. -o 4,_J OTHER PERTI;1E,dT FACTS : ----�-- All VARIAINCE CRITERIA - Section 12.16.100 1. Does this amount to a rezone?' ' 2.(a) Are there conditions and/or circumstances not generally applicable to other lands in the same district? G (b) tti'ould strict enforcer:ent of the zoning code deprive the prop rty u4ne�r of rights comi?only enjoyed by other properties in the same district? 3. Do the special conditions result from the actions of the applicant 4. Are there unnecessary hardships and practical di ffi cul ti es in ar_ out the provisions or the zoning code?0 5. the granting of the variance be ietrimental to the health, saPefy, orel a e of prope rtyo-o'.aners in the 5. is this the min?rru;T. variance that bill make possible the reasonable use of land? 7. Mill the granting of the variance generally e in harmony and compatible with.thi� {' zoning code ,Q Planner's Variance Review 12/17 December 21, 1977 MMO TO: Harry 1,.hitcutt, Acting Director Community Development Department FROM: Leif R. Larson Director of Public Works SUBJECT: BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AGENDA ITEMS FOR THE DECEMBER 21, 1977, 1,1EETING L� 1977 7.1,-1.1,17 U,y o; Edmonds Community D©v01. Dsr)t We have the following comments to make on the items on the subject agenda: V-57-77, EDITH COCKRUM - WO recommend approval of the variance for the strip abutting the Enneking property subject to the following conditions: - Additional off-street parking will be provided on the new lots. No parking will be permitted on the private road. - There will be no further subdivision of the property without expansion of the road width. - The pavement width will of course conform to the 18' minimum standard. V-62-77, LARRY BAILEY - No coamient. V-67-77, CLYDE DIhR-ITCK - There is sufficient space on the property for construction of a garage within the setback areas. We would recommend that -the garage be setback at 'Least twenty -feet from the property line. . t. CU -69-77, MICHAEL J'S STYLING CALON - No comment. CU -64-77, ROBERT SUCHERT - If the applicant has valid reasons for delay of paving and landscaping the parking lot, we have;no.,objections for the one-year period. Approval sh- uld.'only be granted subject to the gravel being retained in the parking lot and the street and sidewalks kept clear of any spill-over. V-68-77, KENNETH HOOD - No comment. V-70-77, STAN GWINN - Approval should only De granted sub- ject to the ;provision that a complete grading plan be sub ,itt.ed shot7ing the feasibility of a home construction on the lot containing the deep stream channel. RHA: 1 v • 1 the course of the design of the building Larry sa;ld that during Every0ing xecti nQ a 11 net" "T re"s and when _'J''a Wilding permit in junc 1v and the-',' , .. went ArVu &- -ed Zhe 15'' setback requirement which they it was e a SKY sib immediate east had an -4t -s 10'� j ,id VAu structure to the property line, so he had thous, - built right ug to the rt improve";y"'t which had oeen h iqt�borhood which would suppo felt a -precedent had been set in t c de - oceeding, based upon the his app 1�cation. Hn said the contvdctor Was pr the design now would , nq. He added that to change Outco7ne Of this heal s hearing. wall, and he felt it wouid be better for the jtting off th of the design than to cut off the wring entail c the integritY no. The public portion of the hearing neighborhood to keep wall to was clonQX by professional and civic reputation mr. Robin son saidAnd he Delievhe knew , ill when he stated this was a simple Ay core than person&YA, gives a lot Of his time to help I that Mr. Bailey jND THE APARTMENT HOUSE oversigplt. He noted MR. LERA S FM preser, the character of Edmonds. THE ARM AND EMT THE VARIANCE REQUESTED IC71UC BUILDING MR PROPOSAL MUD NOT BE DETRIIENTAIL a)u L D B E _�N, AT RAC THAT ,!CE HE FELT THE P R So HE MO%fED T AT I�A S A M IN I I` �?ARJ AN OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, To THE HEALTH, AND MORALS NOED THE MOTION. tJOTION CARRIED. V-62-77 BE APPROVED. MRS. STOLE . SECO CLYDE D-,MMICK - Variance of 11V from required 20' front yard setback V.67-77 t" i no -71— 't at 213 - (RS -6, but 23 years ago and the present structure id, this house N "'u -s . B. D- " ronert! line. This was not a rezone and there were no i s I 7,0L Av the .0 4 e, not applicable to others in the area. t Ice - or COWS" Block said it appeared the ,pecial conditions he proDerty. Krs_ She She showed slides 0, build a carport without a variance. -e area to bu nouse is not the result Of the apple" applicant would have location of the Ose to bring the carport said the present 10c � _cjiqn� and Ahe applicant did not prop cant's se She said it appewed a coNarable Out on he same line as the house. .1-11 setback requirements. She said - -ucted mee ,P could be cOnst,, Ito other property owners, garage -etrimenta it did not appear that it would be t affected, A" that lot is the 10, to the im-r could be built without a ,,edi3te west being the most She said the garage tuned kv the applicant. , As it did not appear that s not a variance variance, sc this wa not appear to be in i justification for the variance, it did 1. A there YO Mrs. Block recommended against aPPrOva harworly with the code- r1flected essentially the same report from the Engileering Dep k 2,)' from the pl-operty and recompiended the garage be set 'D3ct, at loan. The public port" n of the hearing was opened. line -An put in by tfe State when the freeway The applicant said the street --- to gem into the garage. mould The basic pronleFl Was hoer -, n a drop-off and wOU was Constructed. place it 0 garage would be 21 He said 10 rove the garage ba.:," fill eN. He said the , requirw considerable rockery, joy Park which is jnt develop- frcm 0e curb. and acrcss the stre Wood' house would it an angle to the ing. He felt that to put the 0316". . ,,, practica I because of the ,I,e in addiNn tc be Yng ,_Off a the back and also the give aesthetic v id ther" is a ,ry deep dr Med that a 1 rmze- drop-c"f. He s3td ro"pidly. Mrs, Dinvick a begins to dropOuse and garage tocause the,e are windows lot to the west h were built there. way was necessary the no if the garage %.., J wo oe lost e rockery,- trees, and the on th? side of the N.se T"lcn 1) the -19e Mr, D'snick said this d0s'gn would leave He said the length of the gal concrete steps on tho side of the 4"sn s 22� me said he saw no way Of Would be 2V , ,, ,, ,i,tj,j carport I the topographY. Mr, Roy noted the jawp els here cause of Qd ,_qulre a smaller variance. .ne, , i Ye and v wodd be , , ­ - that a 21 garli- Van then closel- public portion of the hearingOF ADJUSTMENT Page 3 - December 21, 1977 Mr. Robinson noted teat it was cep•tainl! goodtatuto nubs�notemingy are held, as this ratter demonst,-ated e al known without the expapplanation wasereachingntooefarblic and that1ng. He possiblyfelt, comprom, the l d e cos�prornise could be reached. r. Roy felt the garage could be square off but would not necessarily be the most attractive and it would be hard to back out of it. he ..said it wouldn't do anything for the street aesthetically. Mr. Bailey felt this was not a minimum, variance and he thought there were alternatives. Mrs. Stole said it bothered ther farththat the house was already inthy robsetback lem. GMrs. Blockthey wtedasto go asked whether she although he ung r,tood p'. r racor�nrendation since hearing the discussion felt any differently abOul he She said she was aware of the driveway situation and she thought it could be worked out by siting it back further, but it may entail a retaining wall. She said she thought there were other alternatives. Mr. Roy said he still felt the setback asked was greater that it needed to be. He proposed a variance of 9,' rather than the lly requested. He felt a 22' they owned .the adjacent property so they could garage was enough and that build a workshop or storagespace. It was then determined that there were not sufficient and ac accurate e te enough nodrawings t measureddther'disation as Mrs. tances indicated. liR. ROBINSON FtOVEO, SECONDED BY MR. ROY, THAT V47-77 BE CONTINUED TO DECEMBER 20, T977 IN ORDER TO OBTAIN MORE ACZURATE INFOR- ;taT10t3. !•'?TION CARRIED. A short recess was announced. Cu -69_77 L;: 1KEL J'S STYLING SALON_ - Condiltional Use Permit for Beauty Salon at ;631 212th St. S.sd. �R1iL; M. Block indicated this establishment had been in existence for some tiFy, It is a requireren= that a beauty shop in an RC'. zone have a Conditional use Permit in order to obtain a business license, The use haG ce^. e fisting and app,rentiy had caused no problems, but there had been than i?i,t rr`rrrershia. The building was existing and parking PP + adequate. T��re hao.bee no complaints from adjacent me ,rs. Block indicated that the use appeared toin anmT 10 Kim.bnd 1tShet the ,e criteria for beauty s%cOPS as a secondary we recori=ended approval and hov;ed slides of the site. The public hearing was opened, no one Wishes. to speak, and the public0%p,>04ELCU-69-77ion was cBECAUSE MRS. DERLETH MOVED. S Co J LY '1rS. STOLE, 10 iT HAD BEEN A BtUTY c�L, i AND IT MET THE CRITERIA FOP. A CONDITIONAL USE EE PERMIT. MOTION CARRIED. �JVLHz f1 J'L+� ' rock surface. tU-64-77 - C 1 ERT S�iERT_ - Conditional Use Q:rriit for temporary gravel, partiing lot at 8430 imin St. (ME) ',•firs. Block read aloud the critQW18'for016nditional Use Permit for a temporary parking lot. She shwwed••slid'es of the existing parking lot. She said the reason the applicant wished to pursue a Conditional Use permit for a temporary parking lot was because he intended in the near suture to request a rezone for development of a shopping mall. idrs' Block said the problem with gravel parkfnti.lots is the disbursement of gravel r�teri,l into ,he s,reC't.s. The driveway in this case is paved so the a to Engineering Devartr,;nt did not ob,ec ts hong I's Proverrto cher ade street. crntai she ga vel n ti a io, so r t oe The amount of parking Stall area was adequate. Mrs. Block said there had been no complaints from adjoining property owners and the parking lot had been in existence `,r sotime, The applicant had been to the ;ani es Design Board f-s;e�r he 1<nt10 to rdonstruct an hadapprovedaddition to his the proposal with Structure, and the menitltt5 esigi , I arced. certain' restr ction . The public por1ldS 0Ption of the hearing EDi•iONDS BOARD OF ADJUSTi•1ENT Paye r1 - December 21, 19-17 M EUMONDS BOARO,-OF ADJUSTMENT December 28, 1977 A special meeting of the Edmonds Board of Aditustr-ent was called to order by Chairman Al Bailey at 7:35 p.m, in the Council Chamtters of the Edmords Civic Center. PRESENT ABSENT STAFF PRESENT Al Bailey Alice Stop'• Mary Lou Block, Associate Planner Ken Hovde Paul Roy Skip Simmons, Fire Inspector Flarold Hatzenbuhler Ann 'Der Ieth' Wayne Tanaka, City Attorney Ed Robinson Aria Marie Violette, Recording Eerrit Visser Secretary Bill Leraas Chairman Bailey weicomed the audience and explained the functions of the Board, the procedure for handling of the herrings. and the method of appealing decisions of the Bo.rd. APPF;FAL OF MIttUTES 14-' utes of the regular, meeting of December 21, 1977, had not been distributed ret. P," MOTION WAS MADE BY MR. ROBI`1SON; SECot15E5 SY t?R. HATZENBUHL ER, THA, THE r=PROVAL OF -THE MINUTES BE POSTPONED UNTIL JANUARY 13, 1978. MOTION CARRIED. Before starting on the =Benda, mr. Robinson asked the Staff if it ,,,cold be possi- ble to get an updated copy of the roster of Board of Adjustment members. Mary Lou Block replied that this would be sent to all members. AGENDA V_67_77 CLYDE DI1'MICK - Variance of ll';' from required 20' front yard setback —at -21-3 Elm Street. (RS -6) A MOTION WAS MADE BY N RtIBI'1S,3N, SECONDED BY PiR. L ERa?S, -�4;J V-67-77 BE CONTINUED '10 THE JANUARY 18, 1,978 MEE�U;G. MOTION CARRIED. Y-71-77 ALBERT GRONVOLD - Variance to allow 4 -unit apartment tuiiding on access easer•:enc alread;v°serving more than three properties at approximately 8111 240th S't. S.'d. (RML) Mrs. Block said this application by Albert and Finn 6rcnvole was for a variznt-e on property located north of 2d0th St. S.w., east of niyhway ?9 to allow addi'ional property to access or, a prim` easement already serving four oroperties. Tre Zoning Code re- quiremtnt is tnat a private easeruert pe 20' access eas.Tent a 5' utility eas-anent. A vicinity ;map and slides depicted —se area. The applicants divided the lrtsfr^ming 040th S.'.1. in 1963. They sold the St. Francis ?totem property at an unspecified date." They sold -wo other Tots i:7mediateiy s^uth of the sut4ect property in 1966. In 19-j they ,;Dined toc_ether in a lot line adjustment lith Den Finnegan and sold £o Nor, Finnegan a 20' thereby effective-lv el"inating their or:n potential access frena the s. Block said this does not amount tea rezone. he land in quest is n n ly served tz public ens strict, enforcers int of the preclude the 1p 1 `ra r developine the prot�erty u�'.ress alternate access could le ,,curd. There are practica ,4i.fficu'ties in carrying out the ;rovisions of the Code now, t e arplcant did have otner recourses before this ti;,e. ri A gs'anting of L variance for this use would alio+ ap�rowirrately sixteen. additiocai iuto trips daily and would be detrir n'al to thy peal'? safety end welfare of adjacent prop-" t e>. e r_ar t t on of t1'P eas2nrent is only 15` wide which i<_ _rnsiderrd roarie.;�:ate for fire protection. it s�ould not bar con+patible �itn the re`urrerc is of the Zoning t_ode bCedUSC of the d['pl iCantS' crr'atin;7 ih175 SttUatlOn Lhnp�S_11 1%ES Ji because private street Standards dictate that the easement crust be 20' in width with 1H oavang. P.ued or these criteria, the Staff recc-,-•e`=ded denial. Other departments-ecorncending denial of this variance were Fire, Police and Engineering. The Fire - ko Li cl� W, pal 1 L?JER'S VARIANCE REVIBI FORM FILE # APPLICANT: ZONING ADDRESS YARIAJNCE REQUES'11`' 'D: J t -.. ZONING CODE REQUI RE?'lENT : -`_ � t OTHER PERTIIlET FACTS: ---- r VARIANCE CRITERIA - Section 12.16.100 1 . Does this amount to a rezone? 111- 2,(a) Are there conditions and/or circumstances not generally a plicable to other lands in the same district? y ��,�,�' �:- i� �� > /b)i,oul d strict enforc^rent of the*'Zoning code deprive the property owner of rights cor only enjoyed by other procr.'ties in the same district. 3. Do the special conditions result from the actions of the applicant? i Q, , - Are there unnecessary hardships and practical difficulties in carrying out the 7 c,- T }(�� 1 f CSE'_ kms, 1'i C t_� l� IC> provisions of the zoning code.. a 7' 1 -. 5, Will the granting of the variance be,detrimental to the health,rsafety o weIfare . ? � 1101 � i � -> C . i'C� Q of propert,v in the vi, owners Y• ; - 6. Is m this the inimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of land? it 7. Will the granting of the variance generally be in harmony and compatible wi lr0c- - zoning code' Y , * i . Planner's Variance Review 12/77 EDMONDS BOARD OF ADJUSTMEN April 19, 1978 The regular meeting of the Edmonds Board of Adjustment was called to or- der by Chairman Al Bailey at 7:35 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Edmonds Civic Center. PRESENT ABSENT STAFF PRESENT Al Bailey Ken HoYde Mary Lou Block, Associate Planner Paul Roy Alice Stole Nancy Luster, Data Technician Gary Visser Ed Robinson Dan Smith, Data Technician Harold Hatzenbuhler Wayne Tanaka, City Attorney Ann Derleth Jo Ann Fischer, Recording Secy. Bill Leraas Chairman Bailey welcomed the audience and explained the functions of the Board, the procedure for handlirg of the hearings, and the method of ap- pealing decisions of the Board. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MOTION: The Minutes of the March 29, 1978' meeting had been distributed. MR. ROY MOVED, SECONOED BY MR. VISSER TO APPROVE TYE MINUTES OF THE MARCH 29, 1978 MEETING AS SUBMITTED. NOTION CARRIED. CORRESPONDENCE Mary Lou Block stated that there ire#d.feen no correspondence received to be brought to the Board's attention ae.Ahis time. Mr..Crayton Collins of 21228 Shell Valley Road stated that this was the second time the Panterra application had been placed on the agenda and apparently they were not here tonight. He stated that they already had their foundation in on their house. Chairman Bailey asked Ms. Block if she could enlighten the Board on this natter. Ms. Block stated that this '.-gas a"ly the first time that the Panterra application was to be heard. She further stated that whether he has access off of a private road or off of the existing access, as far as the variance request is concerned, the foundation could be there anyway, He has the right to build on the lot. Mr. Tanaka. City Attorney, stated that the time to bring this matter up was during the hearing. V-67-77 CLYDE DIMMICK - Variance of'7' from the required 20' front yard setback at 213 Elm Street (RS -6) _ Nancy Luster, Data Technician of the Planning Division, stated that the zoning requirement is 20' for a front yard setback. This application is a reduction of the original variance request of 11' from the required front yard setback. Mo. Luster showed ski.cies'of this Property. The applicant plans to construct a' two -car garaqe on this pro- perty. She shoed the proposed design of the garage which will be attached tc the house and will allow for some sLor- age space. Ms. Luster said that this variance will not a- mount to a rezone. There are special conditions to be con- sidered here in that there is an imbedded rockery which would make relocation of the curb cut and driveway difficult. These special conditions do not result from actions of the applicant as the rockery wasn't installer! 6v the applicant.. if this variance were to be denied, there would be difficulty in re- locatina the curb cut and driveway and by placing the garage in the proposed location, it would make the best use of the land. Grantino of the variance will not be detrimental to the health, safety or welfare of others in the vicinity as the garage will he 1 nice addition to this neighborhood and blend we,11 with the ores"nt horses in the area. This is a minimum nariance andthe proposed location of the garage will allow the applicant to use the existing driveway. K the 20' setback: were required, it would cause a reduction of the applicant's back: yard. The grarting of this variance will be in harmony with the zoning code and it will allow the own- er to construct a garage with some storage area as well as ailowing him to make use of the existing curb cut and drive- way. The Planning Divison recommended approval of this var- iance. The public portion of the hearing was opened. Mr. Clyde Dimmick of 213 Elm St. stated that he thought from the previous times that they have been able to have this drawn in the manner which was in line with what the Board requested at the first hearing, and that they have been able to adjust these drawings,, thus conforming to the minimum request, that this garage will be aesthetically attractive if the variance is approved. The public portion of the hear- ing was closed. Mr. Hatzenbuhler asFed what the side setback was on this vari- ance. Ns Auster stated that it was 5'. The members of the Board were in general agreement that this variance would not MOTION: be objectionable. MR. LERAAS MOVED, SECONDED BY N.R. ROY,TO APPROVE V-67-77 BECAUSE IT APPEARS TO BE A PRACTICAL SOLUTION TO ENHANCING THE APPLICANT'S HOME AND IT MEETS THE CRITERIA AND IS NOT DETRIMENTAL TO THE HEALTH, SAFETY OR WELFARE OF OTHERS. MOTION CARRIED. CU -15-78 CHURCH OF THE OPEN; BIBLE - Conditional Use Permit for church related teen activities and Christian education classes at 611 and 621 Bell Street (RKH) Ms. Luster- stated that this application would have to be with- drawn because this particular Conditional Use Permit is for an institutional use• ;In light of this fact, the applicant will have to present"ifs request to the Planning Division and then it will have to, be heard by the City Council. CU -1S-78 VIRGIL SCOTT - Conditional Use permit for fill of 1400 cubic yards at eii030 Talbot Road (RS -12) Mr. Dan Smith,00 a Technician o; the Planning Division,5 tated that Qb Zoning Code required aConditional Use permit for rill over 500 cubic yard,. Mr. Smith presented slides of the area show- ing the ravine and the fill area which is at the base of the hill. A said that there had already been some fill put in place; however a`stcalwork order was Placed on this until a hearing Vas held bn this permit. Mr, Smith stated that it has not yelr been established whether or not this will endanger the public health, worals and general welfare; however it does not appeat: that it r;i11 present a problem. the proposed use does not meet all of the zoning and neneral Provisions requ'rements. The Engineering DePartnent Vated that the applicant will have to reapply for a variance on the driveway slope. The adio n- ing property mould not be idver ely effmted and the neigh ors are not opposed to this dction. Accordinn to the Edmonds Pol- icy Plan which specifically addresses itself to the question of building in this type of ra✓inc location, the applicant does not Pe_t the specific ccndb ons required. Mr. Smith read the specific conditions of the Edmonds Policy Plan which are EDMONDS BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MIN!_=TES April 19, 1973 Page -2-