Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.
This document contains no pages.
Civic Center PropertyCOMPARABLE
ADDRESS • X K 9 " a4.AG ??
SALE NO. L - / ,
LEGAL DESCRIPTION :
LAND USE:
ZOM ING:
GRAJT OR : ;4".0
&RANTEE: 'Pe
SALE DATE: /9.s'9
INSTRUMENT:
Ee TAX NO.:
C ONF IRIv1ED:
SIZE: 6OX /a.a
AREA:
PRICE: a. sO
PD. PER DX,. FT.:
ADJ. FOR TIME:
ADJ. PRICE:
ADJ, PD. DQ. FT.
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Location in relation to subject;
Shape Locein block Lot Site Tract Acreage
Cld. Uncld• Covering
Topography
Grade at ste SteSurfe Curb S.W. Storm Sewer Alley
Water Sewer Elec. Tel. Conn. Avail.
Remarks: Sail, till, drainage, frtge., access,protect., attrac-
tive., Civic, social, come cent., site imp., Bldg, imp., etc.
Field Compa Anal
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS:
V9
WASHINd7ON LAND TITLE ASSOCIATION STAND,MD FORM
POLICY OF TITLE INSURANCE
WASHINGTON TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY
719 Second Avenue
Seattle 4, Washington
hereinafter called the Company, a Washington corporation, for valuable considera-
tion, and subject to the conditions and stipulations of this policy, does hereby insure
the person or persons named in item 1 of Schedule. A, together with the persons
and corporations included in the definition of "the insured" as set forth in the
conditions and stipulations, against loss or damage sustained by reason of:
1. Title to the estate, lien or interest defined in items 3 and 4 of Schedule A being
vested, at the date hereof, otherwise than as stated in item 2 of Schedule A; or
2. Any defect in, or lien or encumbrance on, said title existing at the date here-
of, not shown in Schedule B ; or
3. Any defect in the execution of any instrument shown in item 3 of Schedule A,
or priority, at the date hereof, over any such instrument, of any lien or en-
cumbrance not shown in Schedule B ;
provided, however, the Company shall not be liable for any loss, damage or expense
resulting from the refusal of any person to enter into, or perform, any contract
respecting the estate, lien or interest insured.
The total liability is limited to the amount shown in Schedule A, exclusive of costs
incurred by the Company as an incident to defense or settlement of claims here-
under.
In witness whereof, WASHINGTON TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY
has caused this policy to be authenticated by the facsimile signature of its President,
but this policy is not valid unless attested by the Secretary or an Assistant
Secretary.
WASHINGTON
By
TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY
V
Pvesidnyii
Attest:
Assistant Secretary
JL
SCHEDULE A
NO. F-97321
DATE May 8, 1961 at 8:00 a.m.
1. INSURED
AMOUNT $ 11, 000.00
PREMIUM $ 67.50
CITY OF EDMONDS, a Municipal corporation.
e TITLE TO THE ESTATE, LIEN OR INTEREST INSURED BY THIS POLICY IS VESTED IN
The named insured.
3. ESTATE, LIEN OR INTEREST INSURED
Fee simple estate.
•
4. DESCRIPTION OF THE REAL ESTATE WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS POLICY IS ISSUED
Lot Five (5) and West Half of Lot Six (6), Block "E", City of Edmonds,
according to plat thereof recorded in volume 2 of plats, page 39,
records of Snohomish County, Washington.
n
U
SCHEDULE B
DEFECTS, LIENS, ENCUMBRAW AND OTHER MATTERS AGAINIDWHICH THE COMPANY
DOES NOT INSURE
SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS
1. Delinquent general taxes for 1961 in the sum of $77.30, plus
interest.
2. Local improvement assessments, if any, levied by the municipality
of Edmonds.
0
GENERAL EXCEPTIONS
1. Encroachments or questions of location, boundary and area, which an accurate survey may disclose; public or private easements
not disclosed by the public records; rights or claims of persons in possession, or claiming to be in possession, not disclosed by
the public records; material or labor liens or liens under the Workmen's Compensation Act not disclosed by the public records;
water rights or matters relating thereto; any service, installation or construction charges for sewer, water or electricity.
Exceptions and reservations in United States Patents; right of use, control or regulation by the United States of America
in the exercise of powers over navigation; limitation by law or governmental regulation with respect to subdivision, use,
enjoyment or occupancy; defects, liens, encumbrances, or other matters created or suffered by the insured; rights or claims
based upon instruments or upon facts not disclosed by the public records but of which rights, claims, instruments or facts
the insured has knowledge.
3. General taxes not now payable; matters relating to special assessments and special levies, if any, preceding the same becom-
ing a lien.
(End of Schedule B)
2.1
W
m
D
m
D
W
z
O
z
(n
m
O
z
m
z
c
m
•ulaaag
umogs ssaappu aqI It, But,duzo0 agl So aotl;o agI :„aotlto auzog„ (a) :alulsa luax plus of laadsaa itltnn aollou aellonalsuoa lauduzl
'smut Sutpaoaaa aql aapun 'gatgnn spaoaaa :,,spaooaa otlgnd„ (p) :y alnpagoS ul pagloads alnuim put, anoq 'Bup lauxa aql :,,joaaaq
alsp„ (a) :paansul patuuu aluaodaoa t, so uollupllosuoo ao 'aa2aauz'uotlnlosslp aqI So uosuaa Bq ao paansul patuuu t, So 09SIAap xo
alai[ ut, su alt,lsa luaa plus ul Isaaalul ao alulsa ut, 2ulelx3p uollt,aodaoo ao uosaad But, (f,) put, ';oaaagl laud Buu xo ssaupalgaput
plus saaluuat,nS ao saxnsul gotiAn BIIlsluatunalsul ao Boua2v It,4uauzux9e02 But, (E) ';oaaagl laud But, ao ssaupalgaput plus ;o
uollosjsllus ul sut,aui In3mul Bq 'joaaagl laud But, xo 'y alnpagoS So f, tuall ul paglaosap alt,lsa luaa aql of allll saatnbat, ogm ssaupa
-Igapui gins Buu 3o dlgsaauAto ulaossaoans ao xauAxo But, (g) 'y alnpagoS So E tuall ul umogs a2v2jaom Buu Bq paxnoas ssaupalgap
-ut Bus ;o dlgsxaumo ut aossaoons got,a (I) gllm aagla2o4 paansul patut,u tions :,,paxnsut agI„ (q) :Botlod slgl ;o y alnpagoS ul
paxnsut su patusu suotluaodxoo puu suosxad agl :,,paxnsut paurt,u„ (u) :uuatu Botlod stgl ul pasn uagm stuxal 2ulmoiIo3 aqy V
•Botlod slgl So suotlullurtl put, suoll
-tpuoa 'stuaal aql aapun Bluo alquaaxojua aq llugs puu utaaaq pa2aam aau 'Botlod slgl So aouunssl aql gllm uolloauuoo ul paxapuax saot
-nags of Iaadsaa gllm But,diuo0 aql Isult,2t, 2ulaq Attu ao aeuq Butu paxnsut aql lugl uollou So slg2la ao suollou ao uollou aaglo Buy
•Botlod sigl So suolsleoad aql uo post,q aq Isnux Buuduxo0 agl Isulu u s2ulpaaooad ao suollot, lly •Botlod slgl aopun Bllilqull aql
olut,l oad aonpaa Ilugs ;oaaatl y alnpagaS ui paglaosap alulsa Ivaa aql oI loadsaa gllm Botlod a2v24aouz plus uo But,dtuo0 agI B
IuatuBt,d But, 'alnpagas alt,x ul papleoad 'su uznimaad anssl snoauulinmis aoj puu Botlod sigl gllm Blsnoaut,llniuls panssl si aSuSlaot*
t, ;o uall agI Sulansul Botlod u 3I aluuluzaal uodnaaagl ilt,is Buuduto0 aql So Bllilquli iiu puu 'ssaupalgaput agI So uotlau;stlus
Iullaud ao IInI ul paalnbau Blaadoad Bus But,dtuoo ail of BOettoo hugs puu 'auzus ail 2utxnoas ao 2ulouaplea sluatunalsul iIu gllm
'Bgaaagl paanaas ssaupalgaput aqI put, a2s21xotu aql Buuduzo0 aql oI u2lssu Ilugs paxnsut aql uodnaaagl puu ssaupalgaput aalluo
aql Bud Bt,uz Buuduzo0 aq; 'aapunaaag apum si tululo pus 'a2t,2Iaotu u So uall aql saansul Botlod slgl SI •upmaq pa4u2ax.2as Bllua
-t;toads aslmaaglo si Bllllqutl ssalun 'Ioajap aqI ;o Baaeooslp aql ;o auill agI lu alogm aqI So anit,e atll of sauaq uollxod aeiloa;ap
aql ;o anlue agl g3ttlm Botlod slgl So lunotus aot,; aql So uollaodoad agI of palluxll aq Bugs Bllilgt,ll `utaaaq pagixasap t,aas agI
So uotlxod t, of allll agl u3 loajap s So uosuax Bq Batlod slgl So stuaal aqI aapun uzlslo t, Bt,d of pa4t,2lIgo aq llugs Buuduxo0 agI
xaeauagM •aluuollxodoad aq llugs uogu2oagns Bons 'paansul aql ;o ssol agI aaeoa IOU soop Buudtuo0 aqI Bq apt,tu Iu9iuAvd aql 3I
•Bu73dtuo0 aql of slgSla gaps llu aa;sut,xl llugs paansul aql put, 'pansst uaaq Iou puq Batlod sigl Jl aeug pinom ao 'uzlt,lo gins of
Ioadsaa gllm Blxadoxd ao uosaad Buu IsuluBu aeug Bt,tu paxnsut agI golgzA satpatuea puu sltl8la Iiu of paju2oagns aq llugs 11 aapun
-alai[ tuiula t, plt,d aet,g hugs Buudtuo0 agl uagAA, -Bud of palu2ligo si Buudtuo0 aql gatgm slsoa puu paansul agI ;o ssol lunlot, agI
poaoxa asua ou ut Ilt,is Buudtuo0 ail ;o Bllltqull agy •plud lunomv ail Sq But,dmo0 atll 3o Bltltqull aql aonpaa hugs 'aapunaaatl
stutt,lo ;o Iuauulllas ao asuajap oI luaptaul ut, su Ausdtuo0 atll Bq paaanoui slsoa So aetsnlaxa 'Buudtuo0 aqI Bq apt,tu Iuaux
-Bud Baaea •aluuttuxal Ilugs Buudtuo0 agI So BllllqulI ilu uodnaaagm 'Iin; ul Botlod slil Bud aurtl But, It, Amu Buudtuoa agy •E
•paansul pauzuu Bons So aossaaans et, aapunaaaq paxnsut ut, auzooeq
Iit,gs oqm uotlt,xodaoo ao uosaad Bus Isuiv2v alqultt,et, Bllunba aq hugs paxnsut pautuu u 4sutt,2u Buudtuoo agI ;o sasuajap ao slg2li
Buy 'sBup Alalgl plus So uotlt,xtdxa agl aal�u at,aB auo utglim uoaaagl paauauzmoa uaaq ansg slugs uotlos ut, ssalun pug aq hugs
Bxaeoaaa ou put, pagstuanj uaaq aAeq Ilt,gs luatualt,ls Bans aaljt, sBup Blilgl ltlun olaaetil loadsax illtm anaaau llt,tls uoilos So IgSlx
oX •pauiulaaosu uaaq aeug Iiugs aftmup ao ssol Bans aaljt, sBup BIxIs ulgllm aotlto atuog sll It, Busdtuo0 agI oI pagstuanj aq
hugs 'alquil si Buuduto0 aql pauxtula si 11 iotgm aoj 192uuxsp ao ssol Buu ;o Sulllxm ut Iuauxaluls y •papleoad Maxis su apt,uz aq
Butu uzlt,lo 'utaaaq paldaoxa ao glaoj las lou aauuxgtunoua ao uall `lsaaalul asxaept, Buu ;o uosuaa Bq poatt,dim ao palt,asap si pains
-ul Isaxalui ao uall 'alulsa ail galgm xapun 'uollolpslanf Iualaduxoo So lanoo u Bq uotluuluxaalap lulalpnf luug ;o Iuaea aqI ul •Z
aatpnfaxd gans;o lualxa aql of Bluo uagl pug aanitu; cans. Aq pa5tpnfaad fillsnlag aq Ilugs Auut
-uxoO agl ssalun paxnsut agl ao uvula agl aalpnfaad asua ou ut llggs aatlou gins aeiS al oanlyaj Iugl Iaanamoi 'papteoxd ' alsuttuaa
Iiugs 'olaxnl} luaptaul asuadxa xtus putt 'sSutpaaaoad luSal xo pustuap Bans ;o ail;sus laafgns aqI al pausal gltm duvduao0 aqI go
f,ltl!q'slI Iis uagl'pap?eoad anoqu su 'paxnaas puejap o; lgStx agl xo 'uaetS aq IOU hugs aarlou tans Jl asuajap slave ut aauslstssu
algsuoseaa ge xapuaa Ilutis paxnsut eqj pug 'paxnsut agI laaload of Sxsseaaau se xq os paxnsut ail jo autuu aql ut Outpaaaoad
luSal Bans pua;ep a; 41129 atp 'paxnsut agI uodn ssaaoad Isall Xo amias aalp sAmp ua; ulgllm 14%oduxo0 aqI of eanaas 'sSutpaaaoad
laSal Hans of Aland u St paxnsut agI j! 'pug aatlla atuoq slt It Ruvdtuo:) aq;. of Sutigm ut joaaag3 aallou aatS aauo Ig Ilstis pains
-ut aill palnitlsut aq ]It,gs sSutpeaamid IuSal alms Sus ao palaassx aq llsgs puauuep gins Aus asua ul 'IInj ut Aztlod stgl ;o 4unouxi3
aqI Sut4ud ao tutsla aqI Sutlllas To atutl &vs Is uoildo aql 'xaeanioq 'Sutexasax :utaaaq paldaaxa ao glxo; lag lou st pus joaaag
alup agI of aolad palstxa aeug oI patulula sl xo palstxa gotgm IoaPp xo aoueaquxnaua 'alit; ;o tutelo s xxodn papunvg sSu[tpaaaoxd
lu8al puu spuutuap Ilu of laodsaa illm paxnsut agI pua;ap 'asuadxa un+o all It, 'IiiNL pus 'oI IgStx agl aeutl Ilsgs atusduioO aqy •X
SN011V'If1c1I1S (INV SNOI MNOD
0
0
543 Dell 6troet, Sdmond�, Lnohomi;h GounLy, Washington
10
EARL L. STAY
REAL ESTATE APPRAISER Ek CONSULTANT
1603 W. 1SSTH STREET
SEATTLE 77, WASHINGTON
LI 6-1137
1. ADDRESS (Street and Number)
AI
2. (CITY, 05UNTt-AND STATE)
3. G01011006FOR v71V7LX►t_J
,b&&-';r 13,
8. GENERAL LOCATION
_ 7_
9. LAND USES
to. rY AL OCCUPATION GROUP 11. INCOME RANGE ramlioIV
4hdM S 3sO $ SS'o0
12 © Change In Use In Occupancy ❑ Is Taking Place
14 Anticipated =.re I
AGES OF TYPICAL BUILDINGS 15. OCCUPANCY
OWNER TENANT VACANT
YRS. TO .StaYRS. ®/•� % Q
ESTIMATED RKET PRICE TYPICAL PROPERTIES
oC2 0 $ /5'c7 d 0
ESTIMATED MONTJL RENTAL TYPICAL PROPERTIES
o $
Demand For Amenity
Income Properties
Demand For Rental 4✓
Income Properties -io-
r. EkCEPTIOiALLY FAVOR OR UNFAVORABLE NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTERISTICS
--
DEPAAKD FOR COMPETITIVE PROPERTIES IN ECONOMIC BACKGROUND AREA
None Weak ® Moderate Strong
°r Side- Storm PA
and walk
GWhr Sewer,.
LOT DIMENSIONS�jj(� / � d K�O Ff. C 214d y Sq. Ff.
22. Sito Delsirabilhy
RE1.
1.
2.
3.
4.
S
FNluras
Protection Agoinsl
4
8
12
16
20
Inharm. Land Uses
Physical and Social
4
B
12
16
20
Attradiveness
4
8
12
19
20
Ad. of Civic, Social
and Comm. Centers
Adequacy of
4
8
12
16
2
Transportation
Sufficiency of
2
4
e
8
10
Uhlifies and Services
Level of Taxes and 2 4 6 8 10v
Special Assessments
RATING OF SITE DESIRAMLITY
RELATIVE MARKETABILITY 16 12 8 4 0
RATING OF LOCATION ittating at Alte 11 dlusy„eMfor Relative Marketability) }
RATING
.r-0
/0
�
/+0
7 .2-
Ui
Estimated Replacement Cost of On Site
Improvements —New Condition
Estimated Market Price
Equivalent Site
j 730
Miscellaneous Allowable
Costs
Marketing Expense
%
5
ESTIMATED REPLACEMENT," e, 1
COST OF PPERTY
RO%'4�(� J
•
a 3, a (0z
s
Remaining Economic life 5 Yrs. 47. Own. Occ. Appeal -r
Monthly Rental Value $ J*A S 49. Excess Mo. Expense $ d
Monthly Ren}ol Less Excess Monthly Expense Times Rent Mulliplier of _ % 3 Equal
aG�
�d / SS
ESTIATE 011CAPITIIECOME A S 161,5 0 C%
repairs and that the I —
ESTIMATE OF VALUE IN FEE SIMPLE r�j .5 S / 5-0 U
40. ESTIMATED MARKET PRICE $ `ice — plus Closing Costs $ """^'°e Equals J 'A i / 15 v
ACQUISITION COST OF EQUIVALENT PROPERTY III
CERTIFICATION: I CERTIFY that I have thoroughly examined this property, including available plans and speclRraliom; that the data represented in
this Isper+ are from sources believed to be reliahis; that I have no interest, present or prospective, in this property, applicant, or ptotrrds of the mortgage
DA%- SIGNATUAPW
-1 ! S'
EARL L. STAY
REAL ESTATE APPRAISER & CONSULTANT
. 1603 W. 1SSTH STREET
SEATTLE 77. WASHINGTON
1. PLAN AND ELEVATION IDENTIFICATION
:
2. PERIMETER (Lin Ft) 7
-3 7
17 Description and Variations
of Main Building
FDNS. $
FRPL.
EXT. WALL
SHTG.
---
SUBFL. J ,Jf
FIN. FL.
CALCULATED AREA (Sy. Ft.15.
�/3
RFG.
4.
N
a
Ao
PROPOSED
CONSTR.
CONSTR.
Year Built }/(a
CONSTR.
LESS OR RtlV.
OCCU.
®MORE F__LPREv.
THAN 1 YR. (.6 OCCU.
O
Z lu
o❑
m
DIET
❑ SEMI-
DET..
ROwEXISTING
END
ROW
INT. WALL FIN.
(WUNDER
PAPPLIANCES
OTHER
6. NON-RES. USE
❑ SPLIT
No. of Stories -0-LEVEL
8. BASEMENT 9. NO BASEMENT
r019 % • ON GR. SPA EL
10.
A No. of Living Units
11.
a. Bed Rooms
y
A
b. Living Room
C. Dining Room
3
d. Kitchen
Other
Ale.
f. No. of Rooms
s
12•
a. Bath
A
b. Half Bath
13.
n GARAGE Built -In
'Y�
Carport Attached
No. of Cars .� �1� - ® Detached
STORAGE IDESECR)
ElurnlTr
18.
N
m�
>
OF
Refrigerator
Range
Auto. Washer (Clothes)
� gWl
In
W
14. UTILITIES
Pub IComm.
Ind.
WATER SUPPLY
GAS
ELECTRICITY
SANITARY SEWER i vC I
11 SEPTIC TANK
15. a. Max. Perm.
w Heat Loss IMPR
olb. Calc. Heat Loss
_ C. Est. Annual
Cost of Heating
16.
a.
m
0 � b. Calc. Heat Gair
80
V c. Est. Annual
Cost of Cooling
a
19. TOTAL VARIATIONS
20
i
2017 FOR �
Inrog,
4❑+
2014-d 70--
2014
_
22. BASIC COST
23 NET VARIATION
(From Line 20)
O
3
$
p
8
9
24 MAIN BUILDING
25. ATT. GAR. OR C. P.
O
26. PORCHES
O
27. ATT. TERRACES
28. DET. GAR. OR C. P.
29. WALKS, DRIVES
Y
0
30. FINISH GRADING
31. PLANTING
32. OTHER ON -SITE
IMPROVEMENTS
/
/0 ^/,+100%X
33. ON•311`E IMPROV.
UNADJ.
34. Gen. O'h'd'& Profit
35. Locality Adj.
/O fox
36. Quality Adj.
O
37. COMBINED ADJ.
�.
38. ON -SITE IMPR. ADJ.
39. ARCH. SERVICES
40. EST. REPL. COST
OF ON -SITE IMPR.
IN NEW COND. $
d
41. PHYSICAL SECU-
RITY FEATURES
a. VISUAL APPEAL
OF PROPERTY
b. LIVABILITY OF
R.
1
2
S
4
s
gti11
i Z
p
O
4
8
12
16
20
4
2
8
4
12
6
16
8
20
10
_PROPERTY
c. NATURAL LIGHT
AND VENTILATION
d. STRUCTURAL
QUALITY
4
8
12
16120114.
e. RESISTANCE TO
ELEMENTS AND USE
f. SUITABILITY OF
MECH. EQUIPMENT
2
4
6
e 110
4
8
12
16
20
LESS NET VARIATION
POOL I (Carry Forward) $ fJL3 j8 9• RATING OF PHYSICAL SECURITY -1 76
BTUH43. REAkARKS� 42 RA1fgG CCR15 I
+ (�
BTUH /fi/'� �%' (J�(�G! .�jL(�a�a �K.Q►G.oL
/!G,-nolt�lec.ti�. - o� � �� Gvr1*��Q°.le, �e.a�►�i,
BTUH •�
-(P
11
0
11
521 Ball Street, Edmondci, Snohomish Co=ty,, Wauhington
0
EARL L. STAY
REAL ESTATE APPRAISER & CONSULTANT
1603 W. 185TH STREET
SEATTLE 77. WASHINGTON
1. ADDRESS (sh t and Number)
i,3SA i E
2. (CITY, COUNTY AND STATE)
8 GENERAL LOCATION
-cent
9 LAND USES
It'll 14
10PICAL OCCUPAT� GROUP 11. INCOME RANGE (From/To)
Change In Use II In Occupancy u Is Taking Place
Anticipated
AGES OF TYPICAL BUILDINGS 15. OCCUPANCY
OWNER TENANT VACANT
/YRS. TO RS. % �p'� 0
�
'TIMATED MARKET PRICE TYPICAL PROPERTIES
(700$ �S-
_
ESTIMATED MONTHLY RENTAL TYPICAL PROPERTIES
.50 s
Demand For Amenity
Income Properties —0—
Demand For Rental
Income Properlies —)I-
EXCEPTIONALLY FAVORABLE OR UNFAVORABLE NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTERISTICS
- DEMAND FOR COMPEYITI E PROPERTIES IN ECONOMIC BACKGROUND AREA
None Weak © Moderate 11 Strong
©and Curb Bids- ❑ Storm
PAVIN
OuthF walk Sewer
LOT DIMENSIONS 746� X is
Ft. or Sq. Ft.
yIZUL4 .
_ J
/�" V""s''we
s00,
Estimated Replacement Cost of On Site
Improvements —New Condition
Estimated Market Price
Equivalent Site
Miscellan*ous Allowable
Costs
Marketing Expense
ESTIMATED REPLACEMENT
COST OF PROPERTY
ESTIMATED MARKET PRICE $ _— � plus Closing Costs s Equals
ACQUISITION COST OF EQUIVALENT PROPERTY
s
A $ 4000
A s 4000
Remaining Economic life (2_ Yrs. 47. Own. Occ. Appeal —Pp-
Monthly Rental Value $ 40 49. Excess Mo. Expense $ '0
Monthly Rental Less Excess Monthly Expense Times Rent Multiplier of _10 0 Equals
ESTIMATE OF CAPITALIZED INCOME A s 4-OQ Q
ESTIMATE OF VALUE IN FEE SIMPLE A s 4-0 Q
CERTIFICATIONr I CERTIFY that I have lharoughly examined this property, including available plans and specifications; lhot the data represented in
this rspwl are from sources believed to be reliable; Ihal I hay no Inl rest, present or prospective, in this plopsrty, applicant, or proceeds of the martgags.
510NATUR
PV /
!7
10
10
403 Eftonds Street, I
le
EARL L. STAY
REAL ESTATE APPRAISER & CONSULTANT
1603 W. 185TH STREET
SEATTLE 77. WASHINGTON
LI 6-1137
ADDRESS (Street and Number)
40 3
. {CI COUNTY AND STATE)
8. GENERAL LOCATION
9. LAND USES
10. TY -L OCCUPATION GROUP 11. INC ME RANGE (From/To)
14.
AGES OF TYPICAL BUILDINGS
15. OCCUPANCY
OWNER TENANT VACANT
``//'��L
/J YRS. TO c. RS.
% �Q % %
16.
ESTIMATED MARKET PRICE TYPICAL
PROPERTIES
Is
d-CQ©
$ /,-<Pa
17.
ESTIMATED MONTHLY RENTAL TYPICAL PROPERTIES
$
---,5 Cj
$ l o'ZA
18
Demand For Amenity
Income Properties
f
j
demand For Rental
t
.come Properties -?•
20.
EXCEPTIDNALLY FAVORA EE OR UNFAVORAILE NEIGHWgHOOD CHARACTERISTICS
-
�r e
21.
E5EMAr40 foRofOMPETiTIVE PR
ERTIES IN ECONOMIC BACKGROUND AREA
None Weak Moderate 1-1 Strong
23.
and ❑ Side-
❑ Star m pAV4NG
GuMrr walk
Sewer
24.
LOT DIMENSIONS
x —r Ff. or Sq. Ft
22. Site Desirability
REJ.
1
2.
3.
4.
5.
RATING
Features
Protection Against
4
8
12
16
20
Inhorm. Land Uses
Physical and Social
4
8
12
16
20
Attractiveness
Ad. of Civic, Social
4
8
12
16
20�
and Comm. Centers
Adequacy of
4
8
12
16
20�
Transportation
Sufficiency of
2
4
6
8
10/,
Utilities and Services
Level of Taxes and
2
4
6
8
10
/
Sperial Assessments
RATING OF SITE DESIRABILITY
RELATIVE MARKETABILITY
16
12
8
4
0
RATING OF LOCATION (Rating of Site Desirability Minus
Adjustment for Relative Marketability)
Estimated Replacement (fast of On Site
Improvements ----New Condition 411eG6'
$
7 /0 C7
Estimoted Market Price
4,
Equivalent Site
$
Miscellaneous Allowobte
Costs
$
d
Marketing Expense
%
$
ESTIMATED REPLACEMENT
COST OF PROPERTY
A
'L 90
$
!
I. ESTIMATED MARKET PRICE $ r� �� plus Closing Costs $., .__ ^ - Equals
ACQUISITION COST OF EQUIVALENT PROPERTY $
Remaining Economic Life —,-.. Yrs. 47. Own. Occ. Appeal f
Monthly Rental Value $ �� [' 49. Excess Mo. Expense $
Monthly Rental Less Excess Monthly Expense Times Rent Multiplier of Equals
'—AWv ezwA &'MA2 ESTIMATE OF CAPITALIZED INCOME ® $
AA T ESTIMATE OF VALUE IN ,FLEE SIMPLE ® $
7 �r� r o s-y Z3 -he 4/O
L O / 3&' 74t 3'Y i Oz.) D
���Y3�tsCLeL'L a-'LC-��
CERTIFICATION: I CERFIFY that I have thoroughly examined this property, including available plans and specifications; that the data represented in
this report are from sources believed to be reliable; that I have no into 51, present or plospectiva, in this property, appliront, f proceeds of the mortgage.
DATE
I1IF
NATURE r �f
��v
11
EARL L. STAY
REAL ESTATE APPRAISER & CONSULTANT
1603 W. 185TH STREET
SEATTLE 77. WASHINGTON
1 ADDRESS ((Sr.rar andN-mber)
41t% ���%rar7Ar6
$ 35
2 ;CITY, COUNTY AND STATEI
3. E9I4111A"GR.... �..... .. r :rn
8 GENERAL LOCATION
9 LAND USES
10 r ICAL OCCUPATION 0110109 11 INCOME RANGF iFromf FoI
$ 3.5270 $ -5-500
14 AGES OF TYPICAL BUILDINGS
1S. OCCUPANCY
OWNER
TENANT
VACANT
YRS. TO �Q.YRS.
Y+.
%
16..ESTIMATED MARKET PRICE: TY91CA1 PROPERTIES
,...
17. ESTIMATW MONTHLY RENTAL TYPICAL PROPEpT1E5
IB 'remand For Amenity
:ome Properties -0—
199. t)emond For Renlol
If
Income Properties -1•
20 EXCEPTIONALLY FMFLABLE OR UNFAV&4LE NW;H.11011HOOD CHARACTERIS ICS
� -------'e. - G-'Lnu�- . �� �
•te�r}}
fr'�i-'w
of S ,4,) Jer_
21 DE D FOR COMPETITIVE PROPERTIE
N ECONOMIC BACK*UND AREA
None Weak Moderate Strong
Curb 23 and ❑ Side
❑ StormPAVING
Guner � walL
Sewer
ewe — _W
24 LOT DIMENSIONS :? 15' Ft. x 46 U Ft. or Sq. Ft.
22 Site Desirability
Features
REJ.
I.
7.
3.
4.
S.
[ RATING
4
B
20
Pnr:,•. rion Against
Ini,,,rr, . LondUses
4
8
16
20Attractiveness
Physical and Social
J1216
Ad. of Civic, Social
and Comm. CentersAdequacy
4
8
16
20
9O
of
4
B16
20
Transportation
Sufficiency of
2 4 6 8 10
/O
Utilities and Services
_
Level of Taxes and 2 4 16 —� 8
Special Assessments
j
a
RATING OF SITE DESIRABILITY '�
RELATIVE MARKETABILITY
16 112 8 4 ✓ 0
RATING OF LOCATION (Rating of Site Desirability Minus
Adjustment for Relative Marketability)
Estimated Replacement Cost of On Site
mproveimeny—New Condition
S fJ
Estimated Market Price
Equivalent Site •
$ 00
Miscellaneous Allowable
Costs
$ -1 —7 ,Iq.
Marketing Expense
$
ESTIMATED REPLACEMENT
COST OF PROPERTY
$ tP
40. ESTIMATED MARKET PRICE $ �Qj�� plus Closing Costs $ -- Equals . _
ACQUISITION COST OF EQUIVALENT PROPERTY
46 Remaining Economic Life 30 Yrs. 47. Own. Oct. Appeal --r •�_
48 Monthly Rental Value E z/C-;t 49. Excess Mo. Expense $
SO Monthly Rental Less Excess Monthly Expense Times Rent Multiplier of / ;'L-157 Equals
ESTIMATE OF CAPITALIZED INCOME A $ -500 0
ESTIMATE OF VALUE IN FEE SIMPLE A $ 5-00
CERTIFICATION: I CERTIFY that I have thoroughly examined this property, including available plans and specifications; that the data represented in
this report are from sources believed to be reliable; that have no interest, present or prospective, in this properly, opplicanI or soceeds of the inerrynua
DATE: � SIGNATURE
EARL L. STAY
REAL ESTATE APPRAISER 6t CONSULTANT
1603 W.185TH STREET
SEATTLE 77. WASHINGTON
1. PLAN AND ELEVATION IDENTIFICATION
17. Description and Variations
_
+
of Main Building
FDNS. ® - $
2. PERIMETER (Lin Ff.)
l>b
FRPI.
+k4l
EXT. WALL OLde
3.
/
SHTG.
SUBFL.
FIN. FL.
CALCULATED AREA (Sq. Ff.)
O
RFG.
4.
PROPOSED
❑ CONSTR
S.
�-7 DIET
INT. WALL FIN.
N
A
UNDER.
/
%
SEMI-
PLG
HTG.
NCONST.
f�G
Z
❑DET.
Z
AL 0
Year Bullt �
W
0
ElROWINSUL.
AIR COND,
m
EXISTING CONSTR.
NOTPREV
❑ END
APPLIANCES
�
f
w
2
I YR. OR ❑
❑LESS
ROW
OTHER ,rf
f+i ►'+i'Jr W ]E'
+
OCCU.
6. NON-RES. USE
![[..��4CC�••A�4G�
MORE PREY
® THAN 1 YR W'cu
SPLIT
0
A No. of Stories -qii- LEVEL
f0. BASEMENT
O
9. NO BASEMENT
SLAB CRAWL
❑
A %
❑ ON GR. SPACE
No. of Living Units -�
a. Bed Rooms
/
■
b. Living Room
/
c. Dining Room
a
•
d. Kitchen
/
e. Other
A
I. No. of Rooms
3
-
12.
a. Bath
-
A
b. Half Bath
13.
❑ GARAGE ❑ Built -In
18.
Refrigerator
A
❑ Carport ❑ Attached
Range
No. of Core O Detached
H
Auto. Washer (Clothes)
❑ STORAGE OTHER
(DESCR.I
a�
❑
UTILITY
�a
14. UTILITIES
Pub
Cpmm.
Ind.
Iss
WATER SUPPLY
GAS
19. TOTAL VARIATIONS
ELECTRICITY
/[
..
SANITARY SEWER
-
❑ SEPTIC TANK
20. NET VARIATION
Forward)
❑ CESS
POOL
(Carry a
13.
a Max Perm
43. ARK$
Heat Loss WRI
BTUH
aa
A
f
fiLr
b. Calc. Heat Loss
BTUH
e
c. Est. Annual
e
Cost of Healin
$
-
16.
_
a.
b. Calc. Heat Gain
BTUH
Y
C. Est. Annual
Cost of Coaling
$
21. COST FROM:
2017 FOR - - 19 Integ.
2014-d -!-
❑ 2014
22.
JASIC COST
jJ
w
NET VARIATION
23.
(From Line 20)
(p
24
MAIN BUILDING
25.
ATT. GAR. OR C. P.
26.
PORCHES
27. ATT. TERRACES
28.
DET. GAR. OR C. P.
29.
WALKS, DRIVES
30. FINISH GRADING
-
31.
PLANTING
32.
OTHER ON -SITE
IMPROVEMENTS
33.
ON-SIT7 IMPROV.
UNAp1.
% +100%X
34. Gen. O'h'd'& Profit
35. Locality Adj.
■Q
% X
36. Quality Adj,
r��
%
37
COMBINED ADJ.
! /� %
38.
ON -SITE IMPR. ADJ.
39.
ARCH SERVICES
40.
EST. REPL. COST
OF ON -SITE IMPR.
IN NEW COND. $
41.
PHYSICAL SECU- R.
1 2 3 4 S 11itating
RITY FEATURES
a
VISUAL APPEAL
_
4 8 12 16 20
OF PROPERTY
_ _ _
b.
LIVABILITY OF
4 8 12 16 20
PROPERTY
c.
NATURAL LIGHT
2 4 6 8 10
�y
AND VENTILATION
O
d.
STRUCTURAL
4 8 12 16 20
, Y
QUALITY
e.
RESISTANCE TO
2 4 6 8 10
G
AND USE
V
�f.
_ELEMENTS
SUITABILITY Of
4 8 12 16 20
/L
MECH. EQUIPMENT
G'
g•
RATING OF PHYSICAL SECURITY -)`
/ Q
42.
RATING CHARACTERISTICS
0
0
233 it fth Avenue Northt FjAmonds, Snohomish County, 'oTaLshington
0
EARL L. STAY
REAL ESTATE APPRAISER & CONSULTANT
Y 1603 W. 165TH STREET
SEATTLE 77. WASHINGTON
LI 6-1137
1 ADDRESS (Street and Number)
2. (CIWAOb STATE)
3 *9N ftr`Ctr,it (%fCe yT.Crt�
,�:Aw
8. GENERAL LOCATION
9. LAND USES
to. TY AL OCCUPATION ROUP I t INCOME RANG fFrem ej
,�ee/$ 3_;ro $ s�
14. AGES OF TYPICAL BUILDINGS 15. OCCUPANCY
OWNER TENANT JVACANT
44"YRS. TO
16. ESTIMATED MARKET PRICE TYPICAL PROPERTIES
$ $ o0
17. ESTIMATED MONTHLY RENTAL TYRICAL PROPERTIES
18. Demand For Amanity
Income Properties —}
Demand For Rental
Income Properties } /f
1 20, EKCEPTtONALLY FAV[1Caalc ne .r..�...
22. Site Desirability
Features
REJ.
I.
2.
3.
4.
5.
RATING
Pratectian Against
4
8
12
16
20
Land Uses
4;Inhorm.
Physical and Social
4
8
12
16
20
Attractiveness
/
Ad. of Civic, Social
and Comm. Centers
4
8
12
16
20
Adequacy of
4
8
12
16
20
Transportation
^�
'L0
Sufficiency of
2
4
6•
8
10
Utilities and Services
Q
Level of Taxes and
Special Assessments
2
4
6
B
1Q /
�(
/ 0
RATING OF SITE DESIRABILITY —1►
RELATIVE MARKETABILITY
16
12 8
4
X
0
RATING OF LOCATION IRating of Site Desirability Minus
}
Adjustment for Relative Marketability)
P G
O rJ
rF
Estimated Replacement Cost of On Site
,q�Irrlprovements,New
Condition $lu EsEintated
Market Price21. DEMAND FOR pµpETITIVE PROPE IES IN ECONOMIC BACKGROUND AREAEquivalent Site® =_Miscellaneous
Weak ® Moderate
AllowableNone
u StronCosts $23.
7Sq.
n, �—ry
an
L�� i
Marketing Expense
Side- Storm PqV �
walk Sewer24.
LOT DIMENSIONS
CESTIMATED
�� �.7
REPLACEMENT
COST OF PROPERTY
Ff. x Ft. or
r
/�� � 7 (�
I $
O
ESTIMATED MARKET
PRICE $ -1 S3:5:i292
plus Closing Costs $ _ —__ Equals
ACQUISITION COST OF EQUIVALENT PROPERTY - $
46. Remaining Economic life 4-0 Yrs. 47. Own. Occ. Appeal
AL
48. Monthly Rental Value $ 142Q 49. Excess Mo. Expense $
I
50. Monthly Rental Less Excess Monthly Expense Times Rent Multiplier of ��'�� Equals i
i
ESTIMATE OF CAPITALIZED INCOME dL S % J 5o o
ESTIMATE OF VALUE IN FEE SIMPLE A $ / .3 S a
CERTIFICATION. I CERTIFY that I have thoroughly examined this property, including available plans and speciraot16m; that the data represented in
thisteport ore from sources believed to be reliable; that I have no interest, present or prospective, in this properly, applicant, or proceeds of the mortgage.
DATE SIGNATU E
k
91
EARL L. STAY
REAL ESTATE APPRAISER & CONSULTANT
1603 W. 165TH STREET
SEATTLE 77. WASHINGTON
I PLAN AND ELEVATION IDENTIFICATION
17. Description and Variations
of Main Building
..,.
+
21. COST FROM:
2017 FOR
© Integ.
FDNS. Q $
2014-d --P-
❑ 2014
2. PERIMETER (Lin. Ft.) 30
ir-r
FRPL. r •
EXT. WALL
BASIC COST
$
3.
SHTG. ✓
--
NET VARIATION
F23.
(From Line 20)
24. MAIN BUILDING
SUBFL. �1!
G
o
FIN. FL. �n�
(�
A CALCULATED AREA 45 1.+
�!
RFG. C�
25. ATT. GAR. OR C. P,
26. PORCHES
Q
4
�
Q
N
. a
U
D
*
0
PROPOSED
CONSTR.
UNDER
CONSTR.
Year Built -*-11150
EXISTING CONSTR.
LESS OR ❑ Rof �V.
OCCU.
MORE ® PREV.
THAN 1 YR. OCCU.
5
O
Z .
a--
to
DET.
❑ SEMI-
DET.
❑ ROW
END
ROW
1NT. wAll FIN //
PLG '
HTG.
27. ATT. TERRACES
28. DET. GAR. OR C: P.
29. WALKS, DRIVES
AIR COND.
I
INSUL.
APPLIANCES
0
OTHER �L'C>ti4�
6. }JON•RES. USE
O
30. FINISH GRADING
31. PLANTING
7• SPLIT
No. of Stories } LEVEL
-
8. BASEMENT 9. NO BASEMENT
/ SLAB CRAWL
4 . ON GR. SPACE
32. OTHER ON -SITE
IMPROVEMENTS
33 ON -SITE IMPROV.
UNADJ.
34. Gen. O'h'd'& Profit
_ 10 _ % +100%X
35. Locality Adj. � % X
10.
No. of Living Units a'
•
a. Bed Rooms
b. living Room
/
o
a
c. Dining Room
/
36. Quality Adj.
d. Kitchen
37, COMBINED ADJ.
Y
e. Other Qy �
°
�=
f. No. of Rooms
38. ON -SITE IMPR. ADJ.
112.1
�
Ama
a. Bath
39. ARCH. SERVICES
b. Half Bath
_ --
18
Refrigerator
g
m Range -
40. EST. REPL. COST
OF ON -SITE IMPR.
IN NEW COND. $
?
7
G
10
13.
A .
u
GARAGE ❑ Built -In
®
Carport ® Attached
No. of Cars Detached
-� '
❑ STORAGE ❑ OTHER
(DESCR.1
® UTILITY
41. PHYSICAL SECU-
RITY FEATURES
a. VISUAL APPEAL
OF PROPERTY
R.
1
2
3
4
5
Railing
W
Q s_
O Wi
Auto. Washer (Clothes)
4
8
12
I q,
)(
20
:E Q
ut N
1
1
-
b. LIVABILITY OF
PROPERTY
4
8
12
'16
20
J u
� Q
�_ _
c. NATURAL LIGHT
AND VENTILATION
2
4
6
8
10
14. UTILITIES
Pub.
Comm.
Ind.
4 f
I _ -
19. TOTAL VARIATIONS
20. NET VARIATION
(Carry Forward) $
d. STRUCTURAL
QUALITY
4
8
l z
X
16
20
WATER SUPPLY
X
GAS
e. RESISTANCE TO
ELEMENTS AND USE
F. SUITABILITY OF
MECH. EQUIPMENT
2
a
4
8
6
8
10
ELECTRICITY
x
12
'b
20
SANITARY SEWER
SEPTIC TANK
CESS
POOL
9854
/
g. PHYSICAL SECURITY
RATING OF PH
�/1
71
15.
to
v o
_
a• Max. Perm.
Heat Loss (MPR{
BTUH
43. REMARKS
jyd�LiCG
42. RATING CHARACTERISTICS
ac44
b Colic. Heat Loss
C. Est. Annualif
Cost of Heating
BTUH
$G�/.QLLyJ,
0 o
00.O
b. Calc. Heat Gain
BTUH
���j
lW� L
c. Est. Annual
Cost of Cooling I
$
0
0
0
0 9
EARL L. STAY
REAL ESTATE APPRAISER & CONSULTANT
1603 W. 165TH STREET
SEATTLE 77, WASHINGTON
ADDRESS (Sheet and Number)
(CITY, COUNTY AND STATEI
� G�t77•L"L.
g�ot
S. GENERAL LOCATION
VzOaZI leel�zvz?1111
9. LAND USES
10. CAL OCCUPATION GROUP 11. INCOME RANGE (From/To)
$ 5,80 $
14. AGES OF TYPICAL BUILDINGS 15. OCCUPANCY
� OWNER TENANT VACANT
15
YRS. TO �Q YRS. 5F0 % / 0
16. ESTIMATED MARKET PRICE TYPICAL PROPERTIES
17. ESTIMATED MONTHLY RENTAL TYPICAL PROPERTIES
$ .S0 $ ♦ a-o
1 B. Demand Far Amenity
Income Properties
11 'emand For Rental (come Properties } A/
20. EXCEPTIONALLY FAVORABLE OR UwPAvnY►uc
22 Site Desirability
_ Features
REJ.
1
2.
3.
Prolection Against
Inhorm. Land Uses
4
8
12
Physical and Social
Attractiveness
I
8
12
Ad. of Civic, Social
and Comm. Centers
4
8
12
Adequacy of
Tro -sportation
4
8
12
Sufficiency of
Utilities and Services
2
4
6
Level of Taxes and
Special Assessments
2
4
6
RATING OF SITE DESIRABILITY
RELATIVE MARKETABILITY 1 16 12 8
4, 1 5. F RATING
16 20 ma
16 20 /
16 20
I6 20
Z a�
8 110z
8 I10/ 1 /O
a 0
RATING OF LOCATION (Rating of Site Desirability Minus }
Adjustment for Relative Marketability)
34. Estimated Replacement Cost of On Site
CHARACTERISTICS Irnprovemenss—New Condition $ .06" .2 �-
135. Estimated Market Price -
Equivalent Site $
36. Miscellaneous Allowable
21. DEMAND FOR COMPETITIVE PROPERTIE N ECONOMIC BACKGROUND AREA Costs
37 Marketing Expense
None Weak Moderate Strong, — _
23. ur 38. ESTIMATED REPLACEMENT /
and Side. Storm PAVING COST OF PROPERTY • 'As, �p �_ Guner � walk � Sewer �� I $
21. LOT DIMENSIONS
MIL G Ft. x / /0 Ft. or Sq. Ft.
ESTIMATED MARKET PRICES ` plus Closing Costs $
.Equals
n ACQUISITION COST OF EQUIVALENT PROPERTY - $ 1 3OO Q
rj�GL1�{aA+y� 46. Remaining Economic Life _ — .- Yrs. 47. Own. Occ. Appeal -o-eL
/ 48. Monthly Rental Value $ 60— %Q 49. Excess Mo. Expense $
.GaZ?�J�=vim
50. Monthly Rental Less Excess Monthly Expense Times Rent Multiplier of Ibd Equals
d"7C.ca q
ESTIMATE OF CAPITALIZED INCOME $ 13po -%
REMARKS: A
ESTIMATE OF VALUE IN FEE SIMPLE j 13,oa a)
� � � L, r� �Q
CERTIFICATION: I CHITIFT that I have thoroughly examrnad this property, including available plans and ipscificouans; that the data represented in
this report are from sources believed to be reliable; Ihol I have no interest, present or prospttlive, In this property, applicant, or proceeds of the mortgage -
DATE K6"] SIGNATURE
d'
i
r
EARL L. STAY
HEAL ESTATE APPRAISER & CONBULTAN7
1603 W. 185TH STREET
SEATTLE 77. WASHINGTON
LI 6.1137
,ei 24
6-ao-/96
EARL L. STAY
REAL ESTATE APPRAISER & CONSULTANT
1603 W.IB5TH STREET
SEATTLE 77. WASHINGTON
LT 6-1137
e
4(p �
Q
19
AV
(IV
, 000
�/� E41 � HALL/E 8 i4A4),--dVSOA1
5'4 3 ,BELL ST
//
EARL L. STAY
REAL ESTATE APPRAISER & CONSULTANT
1603 W. 185TH STREET
SEATTLE 77. WASHINGTON
L.1 6-1137
I
;Nee-2 -1.r Ola.-ec e- e—
IO •I �,.� � Jam. {.'-Y- LL-1 ..r �
I
'���.�C+"CJ
20'
l4lele i.
i �� ,�f� tlS FCC li- !wV i.�
��F - l L�7(-
��✓ CEO
F4,
-7 a Sv
4Z c e?
-;0p
s 17t 13e
C�c, p
EARL L. STAY
REAL ESTATE AFPRAISER & CONSULTANT
1603 W. 163TH STREET
SEATTLE 77. WASHINGTON
LI 6-1137
4k( .3 -;Z�
't6"L rSG: G P
,` ,�oo
z c
C 02,. 4e
�Soc� 0
t / -70o 0
s ep 0
4:j Ooo
o
0
0
505 Hobe bray, Edmonds, Snohmish County, )Wa;,hi.n;ton
0
I*
EARL L. STAY
REAL ESTATE APPRAISER & CONSULTANT
1603 W. 185TH STREET
SEATTLE 77. WASHINGTON
LI 6-1137
1. ADDRESS (Skeet and Number)
S� S �I s2r
:WO-4' / " .2. ae e-4--;f
2. (CITY. COUNTY AND STATE)
3. 'l6NTR/tf'TOR� c/ft+�l.
GENERAL LOCATION
LAND USES
ye,
:=;N GROUP 11. INCOME ANGE (From/To)
Change In Use ❑ In Occupancy Is Taking Place
Anticipated
4--
- V
14. AGES OF TYPICAL BUILDINGS 15. OCCUPANCY
�r OWNER TENANT VAUNT
f YR✓S. TO &RS. Q yo �D % Q o/
16. ESTIMATED MARKET PRICE TYPICAL PROPERTIES
$ 6000 s I.5-oco
17. ESTIMATED MONTHLY RENTAL TYPICAL PROPERTIES
$
IS. Demand For Amenity
Income Properties }
19. Demon d For Rental
Income Properties }
NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTERISTICS
21. DEMAND&4bR COMPETITIVE PROPERTIES IN ECONOMIC BACKGROUND AREA
None Weak ® Moderate El Strong
23.rb
and EJ
Side- Storm PAVING � �
Gvnrr walk Sewer Ity Q�l A
24. LOT DIMENSIONS / �Q
(JJpFt. x IO O Ft. or
63
22. ilte Desirability
Features
REJ
I
y
3.
4.
S.
RATING
Protecficn Against
4
e
12
16
20
lnllarm. Land Uses
%&
Physical and Social
4
8
12
16
20
Attractiveness
1i 7
Ad. of Civic, Social
4
8
12 116
20
and Comm. Centers
D
Adequacy of
Transportation
4
8
12
16
20
A
O
StilA01111cy of
2
4
6
8
10'
U fliNes and Services
/
X
,O
Level of Taxes and
2
4
6
8
lq/
/`
/O
Special Assessments
RATING OF SITE DESIRABILITY -0-
7 vZ
RELATIVE MARKETABILITY
16
12
8
4
/�
0
RATING OF LOCATION (Ratingetof Sit* Desirability Minus
}
Adlurneat for Relative Marketability)
Estimated Replacement Cost of On Site
s
Improvements —New Condition
Estimated Market Price -
Equivalent Site
s�
Miscellaneous Allowable
Costs
Marketing Expense %
S
ESTIMATED REPLACEMENT
COST OF PROPERTY
$
4Z CZ"
Ft. - 4-
46. Remaining Economic Life — S Yrs
48. Monthly Rental Value $ - - -Y-51---
47. Own. Occ. Appeal f
49. Excess Mo. Expense $ L' -
50. Monthly Rental Less Excess Monthly Expense Times Rent Multiplier of /0 Equals
�+, /
ESTIMATE OF CAPITALIZED INCOME s /0.7 7,0
Assuming completion of proposed construction, ❑itararians, repairs and that the
property Is unencumbered by special assessments: ESTIMATE OF VALUE IN FEE SIMPLE
ESTIMATED MARKET PRICE S /4 Cn 0 plus Closing Costs $ -- =� Equals
ACQUISITION COST OF EQUIVALENT PROPERTY
s/0-5-00
A s /oSo0
CERTIFICATION: I CERTIFY that I hove Ihotoughly asammad this property, including available plans and spscificationl: that the data represented in
this report am from sources believed to be reliable; that I have no infer st, present or prospective, in this property, opplicow, or roceads of the mortgage.
PATE ��00/ SIGNATURE n
)q
T- PLAN AND ELEVATION
2. PERIMETER (Lin Fhl
CALCULATED AREA (Sq. FQ
/v
4. N ❑ PROPOSED
CONSTR.
5.
0 DET.
❑ UNDER
s CONSTR.
CONSTR.
O SEMI-
DET.
7 Year Built -0- � y�G} 16
W
j F ❑ ROW
EXISTING CONSTR
m
CK
END
OR ❑ PR CU
ROW
O LESS
r,r
MORE ® PREV
6. NON-RES. USE
occ
LA THAN 1 YR OC'Ctf i
C7
7'
No. of Stories w/
SPLIT
LEVEL
8. BASEMENT 9. NO BASEMENT
SLAB CRAWL
• �D % I
ON
GR, SPACE
la
No. of Llving Units
a. Bed RoomsAL
3
b. Living Room
c. Dining Room
f
3 d. Kitchen
P e. Other
f. No. of Rooms
!
Cam`
12. w a. Bath
f
Is. Half Bath
I
GARAGE
Carport
a
A 2 No. of Cars /
STORAGE ❑ OTHER
(DESCR i
UTILITY
14. UTILITIES Pub
WATER SUPPLY
GAS
ELECTRICITY
SANITARY SEWER
SEPTIC TANK
15. a• Max. P61m.
Heot Loss (MPRI
m -
b- Calc. Heat Loss
_ -C.-Est . Annual
Cost of Healiri $
16. G
W
B b. Calc. Heat Gain
80
Y c. Est, Annual _
Cost of Cooling $
EARL L. STAY
REAL ESTATE APPRAISER & CONSULTANT
1603 W. 168TH STREET
SEATTLE 77. WASHINGTON
17 Description and Vorlallons
of Main Building +
FDNS
FRRF ! + ?gI J
EXT. WALL
SHTG.
SUBFL.
FIN. FL.
RFG
INT. WALL FIN.
PLG.
HTG.
AIR COND.
INSUL.
APPLIANCES
OTHER&
ElBuilt -In IB,
❑ Attached
N
� W
Detached > !r
�F� 0 W
rit
Comm. Ind. 4
19.
20.
CESS
POOL
43.
BTUH
■
rA
Range
Auto. Washer (Clothes)
TOTAL VARIATIONS '
NET VARIATION
(Carry Forward) $
r-�
3po
21. COST FROM
2017 FOR -)` Inleg,
2014-d 201A
22. BASIC COST
NET VARIATiON
23. (From Line 20)
24 MAIN BUILDING 6
25. ATT. GAR. OR C. P.
26. PORCHES
27. ATT. TERRACES
28. DET. GAR. OR C. P.
61
29. WALKS, DRIVES
30. FINISH GRADING IWO
31. PLANTING
32. OTHER ON -SITE
IMPROVEMENTS
33. IMPROV.
UNAOJ
34. Gen. O'h'd'& Profit /Gp %+i00%x
35. Locality. Adj. /Q %x
36. Quality Adj. O
37. COMBINED ADJ. l/%
38. ON -SITE IMPR. ADJ. r
39. ARCH. SERVICES Y
40. EST. REPL. COST
OF ON -SITE IMPR.
IN NEW COND.
41 PHYSICAL SECU-
RITY FEATURES R. 1 2 3 4 3 Rating
a. VISUAL APPEAL 4 8 12 16 20
_ OF PROPERTY
b. LIVABILITY OF 4 8 12 16 20 8
PROPERTY
c. NATURAL LIGHT 2 4 6 8 10
AND VENTILATION (p
d. STRUCTURAL 4 8 12 161201 a
QUALITY ka
e. RESISTANCE TO 2 4 6 8 to
ELEMENTS AND USE
f. SUITABILITY OF s B 12 16 20 p
MECH. EQUIPMENT a
9• RATING OF PHYSICAL SECURITY -10-
,42. RA iNG CHARACTERISTICS
/9
0
0
0
0
EARL L. STAY
REAL ESTATE APPRAISER & CONSULTANT
1603 W. 185TH STREET
SEATTLE 77. WASHINGTON
LI 5-1137
1. ADDRESS (Street andN m r)
So 9
2, (CITY, COUNTY AND STATE)
GENERAL LOCATION
I Aza
LAND USES
,� -�
TYPS CCUPAtION GROUP 11. INCOME RANGE (From/To)
s 15-oo s .55oo
© Change In Use ❑ In Occupancy Is Taking Place
® Anticipated
14.
AGES OF TYPICAL BUILDINGS 15. OCCUPANCY
OWNER VACANT
TTENANT
YRS. TO j O YRS. �� % 4
16.
ESTIMATED MARKET PRICE TYPICAL PROPERTIES
$
f$ /S-bo )
17.
ESTIMATED MONTHLY RENTAL TYPICAL PROPERTIES
$
5"6 $ /a S
1 B.
Demand For Amenity
Income Properties
19.
Demand For Rental
�r
Income Properties -i•
20.
r" -•PTIO Y FAVORABLE OR UNFAVORABLE NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTERISTICS
21.
DEMAND FOR COMPETITIVE PROPERTIES IN ECONOMIC BACKGROUND AREA
None Weak ® Moderate 11 Strong
23.
frum G
PAVIN
and aStorm El walk
Hr walk � Sewer +��►���J�
24.
LOT DIMENSIONS
90 Ft, Sq. Ft.
x Epp Ft. or
22. Site Desirability
RE).
1.
2.
3.
4.
S.
RATING
Features
Protection Against
4
8
12
16
20
Inhorm. Lon d Uses
Physical and Social
4
8
12
16 1
20
Attractiveness
/
Ad. of Civic, Social
4
8
12
16
20
and Comm. Centers
A0
Adequacy of
Ttansportalion
4
8
12
16
20
pZ Q
Sufficiency of
2
4
6
6
10
UHIiHes and Services
(Q
Level of Taxes and
2
4
e
8
10
/O
Special Assessments
RATING OF SITE DESIRABILITY
RELATIVE MARKETABILITY
16 12 B
4 -1-
0
RATING OF LOCATION (Me" Slte Desirability Minus
Aeliushnelrt for Relative ftlerkefabllBy)
(J O
Estimated Replacement Cost of On Site
Impravements—New Condition
$ I•s�T6__V
`J
Estimated Market Price
Equivalent Site •
$ 6 S Q d
Miscellaneous Allowable
Costs
Marketing Expense
%
ESTIMATED REPLACEMENT •
COST OF PROPERTY
3 S
s �C oZ t�
ESTIMATED MARKET PRICE $ 04 plus Closing Costs S '"_ _ Equals
ACQUISITION COST OF EQUIVALENT PROPERTY • $ 1•3S,o d
46. Remaining Economic Life Yrs. 47. Own. Occ. Appeal --p•e7X451
s 48. Monthly Rental Value $ 1z 4za — 49. Excess Mo. Expense $ .¢
50. Monthly Rental Less Excess Monthly Expense Times Rent Multiplier of _- �� _— Equals
E TI ATE OF CAPITALIZED INCOME A $ I3S r�
ESTIMATE OF VALUE IN FEE SIMPLE A $
CERTIFICATION: I CEITIFY that I hove thoroughly oxamined Ihis property, including avolioble plant and specifications; Ihat the data represented in
this rtport are from sources believed to be reliable; that I have no interest, present or prospective, in this property, appficant, or praeeed, of the mortgage.
gATE��/j ISIGNATUR� y / �
EARL L. STAY
REAL ESTATE APPRAISER & CONSULTANT
1603 W. 185TH STREET
SEATTLE 77. WASHINGTON
1. PLAN AND ELEVATION IDENTIFICATION
17 Description and Variations
of Main Building
_
+
21. COST FROM:
_
2017 FOR
-
4014-d -I►-
® Integ.
FDNS. b
❑ 2014
2. PERIMETER (Lin Ft.)
3.
FRPL. / �( y
EXT. WALL
SHTG.
22. BASIC COST
$
23 NET VARIATION
(From Line 20)
SUBFL.
_ -
CALCULATED AREA (Sa Ft.)
FIN. FL.
24 MAIN BUILDING
p
RFG.
25. ATT. GAR. OR C. P.
4.
N
P
❑ PROPOSED
CONSTR.
❑UNDER
CONSTR.
Year Built❑ROW
EXISTING CONSTR.END
LESS OR ❑ NOLU
MORE EV,
THAN 1 YR. CII.
5.
I
Z w
�
m
DET-
SEMI-
DET.
ROW
INT. WALL FIN.
PLG.
7
26, PORCHES
Z
HTG,
27. ATT. TERRACES
AIR COND.
INSUL.
28. DET. GAR. OR C. P.
NCES
29. WALKS, DRIVES
v
OTHER
Ai
6. NON-RES. USE
0 %
30. FINISH GRADING
qL
31. PLANTING
32. OTHER ON -SITE
IMPROVEMENTS
7. SPLIT
No. of Stories -0-- j)-*' LEVEL
8. BASEMENT 9. NO BASEMENT
ON GR. SPA EL
33. QN,5I E IMPROV'UNAD
lD
- -
10.
k No. of Living Units �
-
34. GO'h'd'& Pfit
en. Profit
- �
%
+ 100 % X
1AL 1
a. Bed Rooms
Z-
35. Locality Adj.
% X
b. Living Room
I
AL=
c. Dining Room
36. Quality Adj.
37. COMBINED ADJ.
38. ON -SITE IMPR. ADJ.
/OQ
%_
d. Kitchen
J
�r
%
e. Other
f. No. of Rooms
S
Q
12.1
A
a. Bath
39. ARCH. SERVICES
b. Half Bath
40. EST. REPL. COST
OF ON -SITE IMPR.
IN NEW COND. $
u
P
® GARAGE Built -In
Carport Attached
No. of Cars -2-®Detached
f- --
STORAGE ❑ OTHER
❑ (DESCR.I _
UTILITY
18.
v1
Refrigerator
Range
41. PHYSICAL SECU-
RITY FEATURES
R.
1
2
3
4
S
Rot#ng
W
I.
� -
Auto. Washer (Clothes)
a. VISUAL APPEAL
OF PROPERTY
4
8
12
16IE
20
Y
O W
9t-
.4
r
b. LIVABILITY OF
PROPERTY
4
e
12
le
20
y
N
-
c. NATURAL LIGHT
AND VENTILATION
d. STRUCTURAL
QUALITY
e. RESISTANCE TO
ELEMENTS AND USE
f. SUITABILITY OF
EQUIPMENT
9• RATING OF PHYSICAL
2
14. UTILITIES
Pub
Comm.
Ind.
4
/
WATER SUPPLY
2
V48110
GAS
ELECTRICITY
19. TOTAL VARIATIONS
4
SANITARY SEWERMECH.
20 NET VARIATION
(Carry Forward)
SECURITY
nn
SEPTIC TANK
LESS
❑ POOL
15.
to
J o
a. Max. Perm.
Heat Loss (MPRI
BTUHor
43 UMARKS
+K�FSlcYf✓
42. RATING CHARACTERISTICS
7-
b. Calc. Heat Loss
BTUH
= G
e. Est. Annual
Cost of Heating
$
ejl�t- Alt
16.
al
a
-- -
Of
0
0
b. Calc. Heat Gain
BTUH
ov
V
c. Est. Annual
Cost of Cooling
$
)
1
515 Hehe Way, FAmonds, aiohomish County, Washington
A
EARL L. STAY
REAL ESTATE APPRAISER & CONSULTANT
1603 W. 185TH STREET
SEATTLE 77. WASHINGTON
1. ADDRESS (Sheet andNumber)
� /� f
2. ICE . UN AND STATE)
W �k
3. LeN%kffAR
Av
8. GENERAL LOCATION
22. Site Desirability REJ. 1. 2.
3. 4, 5.
RATING
Features
9. LAND USES
Protection Against 4 8
Inhorm. Land Uses
12 16 20
t
6,0V
Physical and Social 4 8
12 16 2a
I
I
Attractiveness
,
ICAL OCCUPATION GROUP 1 1. INCOME RANGE 1
Ad. of'Civic, Social 4 8
12 16 20
I
and Comm. Centers
n
aVd
Change In Use El In OccupancyAdequacy
❑ Is Taking Place
a
of 4 8
Transportation
12 16 20
� a
Anticipated
Sufficiency of 2 4
6 8 10
� �/
0
Utilities and Services
Level of Taxes and 2 4
6 8 10
�+Q
Special Assessments
X
— _
RATING OF SITE DESIRABILITY —).-
i a
AGES OF TYPICAL BUILDINGS 15. OCCUPANCY
16 12
8 4 0
OWN
OWNER TENANT VACANT
RELATIVE MARKETABILITY
t`.
f RS. TO YRS. 7 •/. p % Q %
RATING OF LOCATION (Rating of Site Desirability Minas }
Adjustenesrt far Relative Marketability)
�!1
D
ESTIMATED MARKET PRICE TYPICAL PROPERTIES
�00 $
pp
ESTIMATED MONTHLY RENTAL TYPICAL PROPERTIES
Estimated Replacement Cost of On Site
Improvements —Now Condition
$
$ ��`�
Esti�®
ite Aries
Demand Far Amenity
Equivalent ent Sated
J
Income Properties }�
Miscellaneous Allowable
Demand For Rental
Costs
Income Properties -f• ��
Marketing Expense
% s
EKCEPTIO LY FAVOIfABL R UNFAVORABLE NEIGHBORHOOD CHARAMSISTiCS
n�
COSESTIT OF ATED REPLACEMENT
OF PROPERTY r�
`
$ /
LAND FOR COMPETITIVE PROPERTIES IN ECONOMIC BACKGROUND AREA
None El Weak ® Moderate Strong
13 Curb
and Side- ❑ Storm PAVI
Gvfler walk Sewer
LOT DIMENSIONS '44- ,e
F1• x Ft. or Sq. Ft.
ESTIMATED MARKET PRICE $ plus Closing Costs $ �" '� Equals �y
ACQUISITION COST OF EQUIVALENT PROPERTY
46. Remaining Economic Life S Yrs. 47. Own. Occ. Appeal—0-11t9,0
48. Monthly Rental Value $„ / Q 49. Excess Mo. Expense $-
SO. Monthly Rental Less Excess Monthly Expense Timms kenl Mult.plier of Equals
ESTIMATE OF CAPITALIZED INCOME A $ 76—o
Assuming completion of proposed construction, alterations, repairs and that the
orty is unencumbered by special assessments: ESTIMATE OF VALUE IN FEE SIMPLE A S �Q J
CIRTIPICATION: I CERTIFY that I have thoroughly esamined this property, including available plans and specifications; that the data represented in
this report are from sources believed to be reliable; that 1 have no interest, present or prospective, in this properly, applitoni, or pretends of the morlgogs.
DATE SIGNATURE s
zy
1. PLAN AND ELEVATION IDENTIFICATION
2. PERIMETER (Lin Ff.)
3. , - i
CALCULATED AREA (Sy. Ft.)
41-1
4. ❑Pftr WOSED 5•
0r,451R. ® DET.
e UNDER ❑ SEMI-
N CONSTR. Z DET
J
AL O Year Built r
� ROW
G EXISTING CONSTR. m
END
LESS OR ❑ PRW ROW
OCCtl
6. NON-RES. USE
MORE PREV.
R
THAN 1 YR OCCU. 0 %
7 SPLIT
No. of Stories -). LEVEL
8. BASEMENT 9. NO BASEMENT
A �� - 1:1ON SLAB
® SPA EL
10.
A No. of Living Units -0- j
71•
•
a. Bed Rooms _ T
+/
b. Living Room
c. Dining Room
d. Kitchen
%
e. Other
f. No. Rooms
of
a. Bath
12. r
b. Half Bath
9 GARAGE Built-in
A
El Carport Attached
a
■ q
No. of Cars _� / ® Detache
EARL L. STAY
REAL ESTATE APPRAISER Br CONSULTANT
1603 W. 185TH STREET
SEATTLE 77. WASHINGTON
17 Description and Varlations
of Main Building
FDNS. 41 j $
FRPL. rX
EXT. WALL FLSHTG.
SUBFL.
FIN. FL.
RFG.s
INT. WALL FIN. ZzAdAZ
PLG.
AIR COND.
INSUL.
APPLIANCES
OTHER,0,*0i
18
d
Refrigerator
Range
Auto. Washer (Clothes)
19_ TOTAL VARIATIONS
20. NET VARIATION
CESS
POOL (Carry Forward) $
BTUH
w - 111 � !
E
21. COST FROM:
2017 FOR �Integ.
2014-d 2014
22. BASIC COST
NET VARIATION
23. (From Line 20)
Q
24 MAIN BUILDING
25. ATT. GAR. OR C. P.
26. PORCHES
27. ATT. TERRACES
28. DET. GAR. OR C. P.
d
29. WALKS, DRIVES
1 30. FI ISH GRADING
31. WANTING
32. OTHER ON -SITE
IMPROVEMENTS
/
�p
C
/
33. N IMPROV. U
HADJ.DJ.
34. Gen. O'h'd'& Profit
%+100°/.y,
35. Locality Adj.
/9 %x
36. Quality Adj.
��� Vie=
%
37. COMBINED ADJ.
38. ON -SITE IMPR. ADJ.
39. ARCH. SERVICES
40. EST. REPL. COST
OF ON -SITE IMPR.
6
IN NEW COND. S
S RoHng
41. PHYSICAL SECU-
R 1
2
3
4
RITY FEATURES
a. VISUAL APPEAL
4
8
12
16
20
OF PROPERTY
I
b. LIVABILITY OF
4
8
12
161201
PROPERTY
�(
1
C. NATURAL LIGHT
2
4
6
B,
10
9
AND VENTILATION
L
`2
d. STRUCTURAL
a
8
12
16
20
QUALITY
i(
e. RESISTANCE TO
2
4
6
8 10
ELEMENTS AND USE
6
Z •�
f. SUITABILITY OF
d
8
12
16 20
MECH. EQUIPMENT
�[
�p
9• RATING OF PHYSICAL SECURITY -
42. RATING CHARACTERISTICS
r
11 i
0
502 Fiehe Way, Edmonds, Snohomi. ,h County, Washington
0
EARL L. STAY
REAL ESTATE APPRAISER & CONSULTANT
1603 W. 185TH STREET
SEATTLE 77. WASHINGTON
LI 6-1137
1. ADDRESS (Sfmt and Number)
Af,
2. iCITY, COUNTY AND STATEIp
B. GENERAL LOCATION
9. LAND USES
,2e ip —G A
10. rfpCW OCCUPATION GROUP 11. INCOME RANGE (From/To)
�r S ,3SOO S SSO O
12 Ibl Change In Use ❑ In Occupancy Is Taking Place
91 Anticipated
"/!�..e.'Y(' '640w - -
14. AGES OF TYPICAL WILDINGS 15. OCCUPANCY
OWNER
TENANT VACANT
/S 7 YRS. TO JONS. _ O % % °A a %
16. ESTIMATED MARKET PRICE TYPICAL PROPERTIES
$ {pop $ /.SOpp
17 ESTIMATED MONTHLY RENTAL TYPICAL PROPERTIES
S .s-ed $ I a S
18. Demand For Amenity
Income Properties
19. Demand For Rental jF
income Properties -0-
NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTERISTICS
21. DEMAND FOR COMPETITIVE PROPERTIES IN ECONOMIC BACKGROUND AREA
None
Weak
® Moderate
El Strong
23 ®
Side-
❑ Storm
PAVING
and
GVRer
walk
Sewer
24. LOT DIMENSIONS
22. Site Dosiralhility
REJ.
1.
2,
3.
4.
5.
RATING
Foaturas
Protection Against
4
8
12
16
20
Inhorm. Land Uses
Physical and Social
4
8
12
16
20
Attractiveness
Ad. of Civic, Social
4
8
12
16
20
and Comm. Centers
2-0
Adequacy of
4
8
12
16
20
Transportation
X-
Zr7
Sufficiency of
2
4
6
8
10
Utilities and Services
x
to
Level of Taxes and
2
4
6
8
10 i
Special Assessments
�C
to
RATING OF SITE DESIRABILITY - -
L
RELATIVE MARKETABILITY
16
12 8
4
0
47
74
RATING OF LOCATION (Rc; of ifte Deshebility Minas }
AdlvatoseW for ReI1 OV* Marketabllity)
r ' p
34. Estimated
35. Estimated Market Price
Equivalent Site
36. Miscellaneous Allowable
Costs
37. Marketing Expense
38. ESTIMATED REPLACEMENT
COST OF PROPERTY
On Site
CO r., Ft, x /OQ IT or So. Ft.
ESTIMATED MARKET PRICE s _ plus Closing Costs $ Equals
ACQUISITION COST OF EQUIVALENT PROPERTY
$ 73':5 4n)
A $ S0<370d
i $ ., .
$
$ la7 ,S" 70
A $ F�52C:e5
Remaining Economic Life �� Yrs. 47. Own. Occ. Appeal -�
Monthly Rental Value $ 7d 49. Excess Mo. Expense $ _ C�'
Monthly Rental Less Excess Monthly Expense Times Rent MUlfrplier of _ Equals
Ciao+ --a �.s� t�ctL'cr,�. �j,�.�a•,,,-�-- , 7aX"sz�
-A a-,"( o7S5 � J zS !�" 7
ESTIMATE OF CAPITALIZED INCOME A $
ESTIMATE OF VALUE IN FEE SIMPLE
$ XJ O
CERTIFICATIONI I CERTIFY Thal (have thoroughly examined lhis property, including availohle plains and specifications; that the data represented in
this teport are from sources believed to be reliable; that I have no interest, present or prospective, in Ihi< property, applicant, or prareeds of the mortgage
DATE SIGNATURE
3 z.
EARL L. STAY
REAL ESTATE APPRAISER & CONSULTANT
1603 W. 185TH STREET
SEATTLE 77. WASHINGTON
1 - PLAN AND ELEVATION IDENTIFICATION
Irk_
17' Doseription and Variations
of Maln Building
+
21. COST FROMr
2017 FOR }
1:1-Integ,
FDNS. 5
2014-d ��
❑ 2014
2. PERIIAE'ER rn �I.j
s g.
FRPL.
4a x /) C
E%T- WALL
22. BASIC COST
3.
SHTO.
23 ET VARIATION
IFtam line 20)
1
SUepl,
--
® CALCULATED ARF (S9. Ft.)
gOO
FIN, FL.
24. MAIN auILGINti
RFG. � `n
{x
25. P,
dZ>
4.
N
C
®o
G
a
ran
2=
U
PROPOSED
❑ CONSTR.
❑ UNDER
CONS j
Year Built /Q
5.
z W
m
❑ DET
ElSEMI.
DST•
❑ Row
END ❑ ROW
iNT. WALL FIN.
PLG.
26. PORCHES calla
0
HTG. �
,
27, ATT- TERRACES
AIR COND.
INSUL.
28, DET. GAR, OR C. P-
EXISTING CONSTR.
❑ I YR OR ❑ iVpl
LESS PREY-
OCCU.
®THOREAN ©PREV,
THAN I YR. OCCAJ.
APPLIANCES
29-. WALKS, DRIVE
S
OTHER fi" G� /. y-
'L'-�
6, NONAES. USE
%
o� Q u
30, FINISH GRADING
9�
O
3 E PLANTING
SPLIT
S No. of Stories -¢ ❑LEVEL
+-�-
32. OTHER ON -SITE
IMPROVEMENTS
S. BASEMENT
0 %
v. NO BASEMENT
SLAB CRAWS
® ❑ ON OR SPACE
33. ON -Sin IRPfLOV.
UNADJ.
�
t>�
10.
No. of Living Units -.)o- /
34- Gen. O'h'd'& Profit
/G,
%a-100%X
I-
a. Bad Rooms
35. Lcs[a11ty Adj.
/0'v
%X
A €
b, living Room
7
c. Dining Roam01
r
3& Quality Adj.
p
7
Jr,—
%
e
a
d. Kitchen
37. COMBINED ADJ.
38. ON-S1T4 IM1PR. ADJ.
O
o
/o
AM
c. Olhnr ��
I. No. of Roams
�
12. £o
a' Bath
39. ARCH, SERVICES
A
b. Half Bash
4C• EST. REPL. COST
OF Oft-517E 1MPR.
IN NEW COND. S73
13.
A
p
q
17
GARAGE ❑ Builr•In
❑
❑ Carport ❑ Atrachod
No. of Cars pe}ah�
->~ ❑
18,
w y
� :6RITY
Refrigerator
Range
A I, PHYSICAL SECU-
fEA1'URES
R.
1
2
3
4
5
Ratlrtg
a ti
y _
Auto, Washer (Clefhesl
a. VISUAL APPEAL
OF PROPERTYOW
4
B
12
_
16
20
❑❑ OTHER
STORAGE 1DESCR )
❑ UTILITY
a
at N
h. LIVABILITY OF
PROPERTY
;
a
i2
1¢
26
>.
H Q
c. NATURAL LIGHT
AND VENT1LATIOtd
2
4
6
8
ID
�O
14. UTILITIES
Pub
Comm.
Ind.
w
d. STRUCTURAL
QUALITY
4
8
12
1e
2D
WATER SUPPLY
A
6. RESISTANCE TO
ELEMENTS AND USE
2
4
6
B
10
GAS
ELECTRICITY
1[
19 TOTAL VARIATIONS
f. SUITABILITY OF
MECH. EQUIPMENT
4
8
12
16
20
SANITARY SEWER
20 NET VARIATION
(Carry Forward) E
So2
g. RATING OF PHYSICAL SECURITY ->~
Tfo
SEPTIC TANK
❑
❑ CESS
POOI
15.
W
a• Max. Perm,
Huai LaeS (
BTUH
43. REMARKS .'t�t Q
42 RATING CHARACTERISTICS
an
=Br
C
16.
b, Colc. Heat Lass
.4rrn,, ►�-e..l�s�C+-x.
�__/-2i/GzftLh, �� Jt- K
Z. Es1, Annual
Cost of HeafinAV-L
a
+�
ry(�
UU0 L>
iYl 4rt u�Y I ° -
/SA"�
•7 �"c
•
0 0
G
b. Cafe. Heat Goin
BTUH
dU
may/ Cy&�[eAe�L
/� ✓ �
V
t, Est. Annual
Co%1 of Cooling
a - - -
y�
•
•
510 Hebe Ways Edmondeg Snohomish County, Washington
•
EARL L. STAY
REAL ESTATE APPRAISER & CONSULTANT
1603 W. 185TH STREET
SEATTLE 77. WASHINGTON
LI 6-1137
1. ADDRESS (Sheer and Number)
.Si 6) _'dq&e e 444'e-4-
2. (Cg,_COUWY AND STATE)
3
Ae.
8. GENERAL LOCATION
'Cew�
9. LAND USES
r
10. TYPICAL OCCUPATION GROUP
w / A/ .. ■
12. R Change In Use
NAnticipated
I I. INCOME RANGE (From/To)
ki4ls57:s r
.
❑ In Occupancy ❑ Is Taking Place
t 4. AGES OF TYPICAL W ILMHOS 1 S. OCCUPANCY
OWNER TENANT VACANT
_ rs YRS. TO c:7 (Je RS.49n % /O 7S 0
16. ESTIMATED MARKET PRICf TYPICAL PROPERTIES
$ 6 o vo $ sbo p
17. ESTIMATED MONTHLY AENTAL TYPICAL PROPERTIES
$ Sca :
is. Dernand For Amenity
Income Properties }
It. Demand For Rental
Income Properties — 0- 1i
0. EXCEPTIONALLY FAVORABLE OR UNFAVORABLE NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTgRISTICS
0'4f T. L 1 /%' /.terry 19A.vile - OA a . . _
"1.
22. At* Daislrablllty
Features
REJ.
1.
2.
3.
4.
S.
RATING
Protection Against
4
8
12
16
20
Inharm. Land Uses
Physical and Social
4
a
12
16
20
Attractiveness
�.�
Ad. of Civic, Social
4
a
12
16
20
and Comm. Centers
Adequacy of
4
e
12
16
20
Transportation
Z (�
Sufficiency of
Utilities and Services
2
4
6
a
to
A
/ O
Level of Taxes and
2
4
6
a
10�
Special Assessments
`D
RATING OF SITE DESIRABILITY — -
Z
RELATIVE MARKETABILITY 16 112 8 4 0
{
RATING OF LOCATION (Rating of Site Desirability Minus
Adjustment for Relative Marketability)
Estimated Repta t Cost of On Site
tmprovements eve nd(tion s %3 O
Estimated Markel4lrcs
Equivalent Site ♦ s 4000
. Miscellaneous Allowable
21. DEMAND FOR COMPETITIVE PROPERTIES IN ECONOMIC BACKGROUND AREA
Costs
j
None
Weak
Moderara ❑ 51rong
Marketing Expense
S
23.
fhr
❑ Sid.,
walk
Storm
r
PAVING
ESTIMATED REPLACEMENT `� ♦
COST OF PROPERTY
/� O
24. LOT DIMENSIONS
�(}/
/`�
$ O
ID sA ft, x /ram a Ff. or Sq. fT.
ESTIMATED MARKET PRICE 7.2 rjQ plus Closing Costs S_. _ Equals
ACQUISITION COST OF EQUIVALENT PROPERTY
♦ $ 7,:? SQ
46. Remaining Economic Life Z'a Yrs. 47. Own. Occ. Appeal —p -
4a. Monthly Rental Value $ 0 49. Excess Mo. Expense j
50. Monthly Rental Less Excess Monthly Expense Times Rent Multiplier of Equals
ESTIMATE OF CAPITALIZED INCOME ♦ s 7a,66
ESTIMATE OF VALUE IN FEE SIMPLE ♦ s 7eR o
CERTIFICATIONt I CERTIFY shol I have Ihoroughly ■sarnmoq
this+sport are from sources believed to be reliable; Thal I have no
DATE _.
this property, including ovailable plans and specifications; that the data app- ilerl In
nter t, presont or prospective. In Ihis property, applicant, or proceeds of the mortgage
/j SIGNAT
I PLAN AND ELEVATION IDENTIFICATION
2. PERIMETER (Lin Ft 1
3
EARL L. STAY
REAL ESTATE APPRAISER & CONSULTANT
1603 W. 185TH STREET
SEATTLE 77. WASHINGTON
17. Description and Variations _
of Main Building
FDNS. oe-I Yi`7Gi $
Y
FRPL. ,
EXT. WAIL 9�
SHTG,
SUBFL.
FIN. FL. 0
CALCULATED AREA (S4- Ft.)
770
RFG.
4
a
0 o
G
S
a
w
x
PROPOSED
CONSTR
Ej UNDER
CONSTR.
Year Built } / 9 /O
5.
0
u+
0 F
m
10 DET.
SEMI-
❑ ROW
❑ END
ROW
INT. WALL FIN.
HTG.
AIR COND.
INSUL.
- -
APPLIANCES
d� OTHER
/
EXISTING CONSTR.
❑ 1 YR. OR ❑ PREV
LESS CU
O OC
6. NON-RES. USE
1 YR CK:C ®
t7CLU.
7
SPLIT
No. of Stories }
LEVEL
8. BASEMENT 1 9 NO BASEMENT
n SLAB
CRAWL
% _J ON GR
SPACE
10.
AL No. of Living Units --lo- 1
�
7. a. Bed Rooms
/
b. Living Room0
a
c. Dining Room
d Kitchen
.a
a e. Other
n
a
r
f. No. of Rooms
-
12 +
a. Bath
A b. Half Bath
13.
© GARAGE
❑ Bunt -In
❑ Carport
❑ Anached
ea
4
No. of Cars } '
© Detache
GAS
ELECTRICITY
SANITARY SEWER
SEPTIC TANK l
15. a. Max. Perm.
Heat Loss MPR'11
W
« b. Calc. Heat Loss
O
_ C. Est._ Annual
Cost of Heating $
16. a.
0 o b. Calc. Heat Gain
WC c. Est. Annual
Cost of Cooling $
18. 1
1 Refrigerator
d
N {I Range
4 Auto. Washer (Clothes)
-0 MR t
IE
N
w J
N W
W OC I I
19- TOTAL VARIATIONS
d C
. NET VARIATION
CESS 20�Z
POOL (Carry Forward) $
43. REAkARKS
BTUH 7lt'p�, G`e�s! 171,CdA
BTUH
BTUH �'ZGL6f5��
21. COST FROM:
2017 FOR -)` Integ.
2014-d } 2014
a
22. BASIC COST 91,617
23. (Pram Line 201..---
18. 1
1 Refrigerator
d
N {I Range
4 Auto. Washer (Clothes)
-0 MR t
IE
N
w J
N W
W OC I I
19- TOTAL VARIATIONS
d C
. NET VARIATION
CESS 20�Z
POOL (Carry Forward) $
43. REAkARKS
BTUH 7lt'p�, G`e�s! 171,CdA
BTUH
BTUH �'ZGL6f5��
21. COST FROM:
2017 FOR -)` Integ.
2014-d } 2014
a
22. BASIC COST 91,617
23. (Pram Line 201..---
24 MAIN BUILDING
9
25. ATT. GAR. OR C. P.
Q
26. PORCHES
27. ATT. TERRACES
28. DIET. GAR. OR C. P.
29. WALKS, DRIVES
30. FINISH GRADING
31. PLANTING
4
32. OTHER ON -SITE
IMPROVEMENTS
LZ
33. ON -SITE IMPROV.
/
f0
YNADJ.
34. Gen. O'h'd'& Profit
/10 ;.100e/ x
35. Locality Adj.
r %X
36. Quality Adj.
O k _
37. COMBINED ADJ.
�/ �jL- %
38. ON -SITE IMPR. ADJ.
39. ARCH. SERVICES
_
40. EST. REPL. COST
OF ON -SITE IMPR.
7.
3
Q
]'
IN NEW COND. $
41. PHYSICAL SECU-
R.
1
2
3
4
3
aHng
RITY FEATURES
4
8
12
16
20
a. VISUAL APPEAL
OF PROPERTY
/Z
b. LIVABILITY OF 4 8 12 16 20
PROPERTY
l Y
C.NATURAL LIGHT 2 4 6 8 10
AND VENTILATION_ Je
!�
d. STRUCTURAL4 e 16120
QUALITY
e. RESISTANCE TO 2 4 8 10
ELEMENTS AND USE
(p
�z
f. SUITABILITY OF 4 t2O
MECH. EQUIPMENT x
9• RATING OF PHYSICAL SECURITY -0--
42. RATING CHARACTERISTICS
J
0
516 Hobe Way, Edmonds, Snohomish County, Washington
0
EARL L. STAY
REAL ESTATE APPRAISER & CONSULTANT
1603 W.185TH STREET
SEATTLE 77. WASHINGTON
LI 6-1137
1. ADDRESS (Street and Number)
6-IA z
2 (CITY,
3.�E6liifh►ET9R�.�{�77.rEtiJ
B. GENERAL LOCATION
i!A�
9. LAND USES
10. L OCCUPATION GROUP 11. INCOME RAN (Fr a)
$
�SoD $
�Sbo
12. n Change In Use ❑ In Occupancy ❑ Is Taking Place
Anticipated
14.
AGES OF TYPICAL BUILDINGS
15. OCCUPANCY
OWNER TENANT VACANT
�� YRS. TO CeYRS.
O °� �Q%
1.
1'
RICE TYPICAL PROO/VER�TIIEEjS
ESTIMATED MA251-00
$
Ii' -
17.
ESTIMATED MONTHLY RENTAL TYPICAL PROPERTIES
:
o $
�a
1 B.
Demand For Amenity
_
Income Properties
19.
Demand For Rental
Al
Income Properties -�
20
EXCEPTIONALLY FkYORAB E OR UNFAVORABLE NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTERI§TICS
a !
q
21.
DEMAND J109 COMPETITIVE PROPERTIES IN ECONOMIC BACKGROUND AREA
None Weak
© Moderate Strong
23.
and ❑ Side.
❑ Storm
PaVI
Gutter walk
Sewer
24,
LOT DIMENSIONS
Ft. x /00 Ft. or 5q. Ft.
22. Site Desirability
REI.
1,
2.
3.
4.
S.
RATING
Features
Protection Agoinst
4
B
12
16
20
Ighprm. Land Uses
Physical and Social
4
8
12
16
20
Attractiveness
Ad. of Civic, Social
4
e
12
16
20 I
20
and Comm. Centers
f
Adequacy of
4
8
12
16
20
�Q
Transportation
I
I
Sufficiency of
2
4
6
B
10
Utilities and Services
/0
Level of Taxes and
2
4
6
8
10
Special Assessments
RATING OF SITE DESIRABILITY
9
RELATIVE MARKETABILITY
16
12 B
4 '�(
0
RATING OF LOCATION IRrNry of lilt* Desirability Minus -.
AdWanwtlt for Relathe Marketability)
o
34. Estimated Replacement Cost of On Site
Improvements —New Condition
35. Estimated Market Price
Equivalent Site
36. Miscellaneous Allowable
Costs
37. Marketing Expense
38. ESTIMATED REPLACEMENT
COST OF PROPERTY
ESTIMATED MARKET PRICE $ plus Closing Costs $ Equals
ACQUISITION COST OF EQUIVALENT PROPERTY
OIE��l� e�^" i
♦ $
$
% $
$ f 10 413S"
♦ $ //000
Remaining Economic Life Yrs. 47. Own. Occ. Appeal — -�
Monthly Rental Value $ �Q _ 49. Excess Mo. Expense $
Monthly Rental Less Excess Monthly Expense Times Rent Multiplier of %A Equals
ESTIMATE OF CAPITALIZED INCOME ♦ s
ESTIMATE OF VALUE IN FEE SIMPLE
VL►J
♦ $ r/ OO d
--......... ^••• r,w-, rr, 1m1um118 avarlaole plant and speuGmrmnl; that the data represented in
this teport are from sources believed to be reliable; that I have no Inter ,present or pralperiive, in this ptopli?), apappl i rarll, or proceeds of the morrgaga
GATE SIGNATURE/(
2;?
1. PLAN AND ELEVATION IDENTIFICATION
2. PERIMETER (Lin Ft.)
i
3.
A CALCULATED AREA (Sy. Ft.)
4.
❑PROPOSED
rcNSTR.
5.
© DET.
❑UNDER
CONSTR.
O ❑ SEMI
Z DET.
A
Year Built } lf?(
W
C
ROW
❑
m
EXISTING CONSTR.
LESS OR ❑ PREV.
IND
ROW
OCCu.
®MORE [Z PREV.
6. NON-RES. USE
THAN 1 YR. OCCU.
r• SPLIT
No. of Stories .� ❑ LEVEL
S. BASEMENT 9. NO BASEMENT
SLAB C
A O✓% . ❑ ❑
/ ON ,R. SPACEL
0.
A No. of Living Units
]1,
a. Bed Rooms
y
A
b. Living Room
c. Dining Room
d. Kitchen
Other
-
Ale.
f. No. of Rooms
a. Bath
4(
12.
A
b. Half Bath
13.
© GARAGE Built-in
❑ Carport ❑ Attached
a
AI
No. of Cars / Detached
❑ STORAGE ❑ OTHER
IDESCR )
❑ UTILITY
14. UTILITIES
Pub.
Comm.
Ind.
WATER SUPPLY I 141 -1
GAS
ELECTRICITY
SANITARY SEWER
SEPTIC TANK
a. ox, pram,
Heat Loss [MPRj
b. Calc. Heat Loss
c. Est. Annual
Cost of Heatinn 1 $
EARL L. STAY
REAL ESTATE APPRAISER Elf CONSULTANT
1603 W. ISSTH STREET
SEATTLE 77. WASHINGTON
LI 6-1137
18.
Refrigerator
191 'A Range
-1
> Auto. Washer (Clothes)
Ow- I
W F
� N
� W
Q�
19.
20
TOTAL VARIATIONS
CESS 17C1 VA%RIMII%PFM
POOL (Carry Forward) $
43. REMARKS
aruH
BTUH
21. COST FROM:
2017 FOR
2014-d -il-
22. BASIC COST
; NET VARIATION
23. (From Line 20)
24. MAIN BUILDING
25. ATT. GAR. OR C. P.
26. PORCHES
27. ATT. TERRACES
28. DET. GAR. OR C. P.
29. WALKS, D S
30. FINISH GRADING
31. PLANTING
32. OTHER ON -SITE
IMPROVEMENTS
33. QWSITE IMPROV.
u?"AL
34. Gen. O'h'd'& Profit
© Integ.
2014
35. Locality Adj.
' / Q ,e Y° x
36. Quality Adj.
/O 0 %% _
37. COMBINED ADJ
38. ON -SITE IMPR. ADJ.
,/
39. ARCH. SERVICES
-
40. EST. REPL. COST
OF ON -SITE IMPR.
IN NEW COND. $
0491.5,
3
-Td
41. PHYSICAL SECU-
RITY FEATURES
a. VISUAL APPEAL
OF PROPERTY
R.
1
2
3
4
S
ating
4
8
J
16
20
b. LIVABILITY OF
PROPERTY
c. NATURAL LIGHT
AND VENTILATION
d. STRUCTURAL
QUALITY
4
8
1 y
16
20
r y
f.
2
4
6
8
10
4
1 8
1
16
20
e. RESISTANCE TO 2 4 6 8 10
ELEMENTS AND USE f�
f. SUITABILITY OF a 8 1 16 20 /
MECH. EQUIPMENT
9• RATING OF PHYSICAL SECURITY -0-- 6
42. RATING CHARACTERISTICS
77
a.
b. Calc. Hoot
BTUH
zd
0
i
520 Hebe Way, M monds, Snohomish County, Waebington
0
i
f
EARL L. STAY
REAL ESTATE APPRAISER & CONSULTANT
7603 W. 18STH STREET
SEATTLE 77. WASHINOTON
1. ADDRESS (Street and N+ mbeF)
z
2. (CITY. COUNTY AND STATE)
3. CR
8. GENERAL LOCATION
401C
9. LAND USES
I QPTYPICAL OCCUPATION GROUP/
11. INCOME RANGE (FA61ta)
T �G
$ —T—'je ` s �cie
14. AGES OF TYPICAL BUILDINGS
15. OCCUPANCY
y�
A
OWNER TENANT
VACANT
YRS. TO-T YRS.
16. ESTIMATED MARKET PRICE TYPICAL PROPERTIES
$ 6,000 $ ! S00Q
17. ESTIMATED MONTHLY RENTAL TYPICAL PROPERTIES
$ 50 s /1
18. Demond For Amenity
Income Properties }
Demand Far kental
A
Income Properties }
20. EXCEPTIONALLY FAVORABLE OR UNFAVORABLE mnumBORkOOD CHARACTERISTICS
21. DEMAN OR COMPETITIVE PROPERTIES IN ECONOMIC BACKGROUND AREA
None Weak ® Moderate Strong
23. yr ❑
and Side. ❑ Storm PA
Goner walk Sewer
24. LOT DIMENSIONS
Ft. x /1D� Ft. or Sq. Ft,
Estimated Replacement Cost of On Site
Improvements —New Condition
Estimated Market Price
Equivalent Site
Miscellaneous Allowable
Costs
Marketing Expense
ESTIMATED REPLACEMENT
COST OF PROPERTY
ESTIMATED MARKET PRICE $ -/-j.rz 92c:724;2 plus Closing Costs $ -. --- — Equals
ACQUISITION COST OF EQUIVALENT PROPERTY
CERTIFICATION: I CERTIFY that
this ralrod are from sources believed I
$ jo / 67Q 0
A $ 3000
s
S
A /.5 �o 0
$
A $
46. Remaining Economic Life —_sZ Yrs. 47. Own. Occ. Appeal —*--
48. Monthly Rental Value $ /V 49. Excess Mo. Expense $ !9
50. Monthly Rental Less Excess Monthly Expense Times Rent Multiplier of /--L4f� Equals
ESTIMATE OF CAPITALIZED INCOME A s lao o e)
ESTIMATE OF VALUE IN FEE SIMPLE A $ i ';Z—Q r- d
I have thoroughly examined }his property, including orailobls plans and specifications; shot the dolo represented in
s be reliable; that I have no interest, present or prOW(rive, in this property, applicant, or proceeds of the mortgage.
DATE SIGNATU �E.�
.
u
E
303 Fourth Northo Edraondal snobomi.sh County, lwla3 ingt,on
0
EARL L. STAY
REAL ESTATE APPRAISER & CONSULTANT
1603 W. 185TH STREET
SEATTLE 77. WASHINGTON
LI 6-1137
1. ADDRESS (Sheer and Number)
rJ 3 -244"
2. ;CITY, COUNTY AND STATE)
3. 1,
8. GENERAL LOCATION
9. LAND USES
Z-6,
10. rWAL OCCUPATION GROUP
2. Change In Use
Anticipated
14. AGES OF TYPICAL BUILDINGS
11. INCOME RANGE (FromlTe) ■
' $.3.6;�v $ 6 SO rD
❑ In Occupancy Is Taking Place
15. OCCUPANCY
OWNER
TENANT VACANT
YRS. TO YRS.
%
f7 °Ii Q %
16. ESTIMATED MARKET PRICE TYPICAL PROPERTIES
$ Cv000 $ ISIOv0
17. ESTIMATED MONTHLY RENTAL TYPICAL PROPERTIES
$ .5O
to. Demand For Amenity
Income Properties
19. Demand For Rental
Income Properties -0-
y
70. EXCEPT( NALLY fAVORABLE OR UNFAVORABLE NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTERISTICS
21. DEMAND FOR COMPETITIVE PROPERTIES IN ECONOMIC BACKGROUND AREA
None Weak ® Moderate Strong
23. ur
and
❑ ® Storm PAyklG
rGL��I�7CQ.0
walk Sewer
Guff* r walk
_ _
24. LOT DlMEN51C7N� -7 y X 7 7
Ft. x Ft. or / Scl. Ft.
W.
22. Site Desireblllty
REJ.
I.
2.
3.
4.
5.
RATING
_ Features
NOW] 'or* Against
4
8
12
16
20
Inhorm. long Uses
20
Physical and Social
4
8
12
16
Attractiveness
/
Ad. of Civic, Social
4
8
12
16
20
q
and Comm. Centers
Id
O
Adequacy of
Transportation
4
8
12
16
20
2,0
Sufficiency of
2
4
6
8
10
/v
UHlifies and Services
Level of Taxes and
2 4 6 8
10/
�O
Speciol Assessments
T�
Y'
RATING OF SITE DESIRABILITY
Y
Y
RELATIVE MARKETABILITY
16 12 8 4
0
RATING OF LOCATION (Rating of Site Desirability Minus }
Ad)wstmeM far Relative Morketablllty)
/y
7
Estimated Replacement Cost of On Site
1mpr0vements—New Condition
Estrmateg Market Price
Equivalent Site
Miscellaneous Allowable
Costs
Marketing Expense
ESTIMATED REPLACEMENT
COST OF PROPERTY J
ESTIMATED MARKET PRICE;_ f0000 plus Closing Costs $ Equals
ACQUISITION COST OF EQUIVALENT PROPERTY
s 8a
A S -?_70
I-
■ $�0000
Remaining Economic life Yrs. 47. Own. Occ. Appeal f
Monthly Rental Value j _ '-Q_ _ 49. Excess Mo. Expense $ 0
Monthly Rental less Excess Monthly Expense Times Rent Multiplier of 4P -5— Equals
ESTIMATE OF CAPITALIZED INCOME A s lat3e-) n
ESTIMATE OF VALUE IN FEE SIMPLE A $ / -0 00 0
a TIPICATIONs I (Illlrr Milt I hoot thoroughly txammtd this properly, Including available plans and specifications; that the data represented in
this rtpefl are from souress believed to be reliable; That I have no in fast, present or prospective, in this propsrty, opplicaat, or proceeds of the mortgage.
DATES QaQ SIGNATURE
26
EARL L. STAY
REAL ESTATE APPRAISER & CONSULTANT
1603 W. 185TH STREET
SEATTLE 77. WASHINGTON
1. PLAN AND ELEVATION IDENTIFICATION
Z• 3
1■
17 Description and Variations
of Main Building
FDNS Q`�� �17jc- $
FRPL. gr /KJ G
EXT. WALL ( � '
SHTG
SUBFL.
+
}
r O
1
i
31
!
-
21. COST FROM:
2017 FOR
4014-d -� -
J-
InMg.
2014
TT
2. PERIMETER (Lin Ft,)
22. BASIC COST $
gg
f(/
3.
-
NET VARIATION
23. (From Line 201
7-4FIN.
FL.
24 MAIN BUILDING
-
25. ATT. GAR. OR C. P.
26. PORCHES
- --
27. ATT. TERRACES
+
CALCULATED AREA (Sq Ft)
p
RFG. • 1ls
-
--
4 PROPOSED 5,
CONSTR. DEt.
UNDER
SEMI-
CONSTR O
N Z w� DET
CL
0 OZ Your Bull >- ROW
G EXISTING CONSTR. m
3 END
iiiT❑ 1 YR OR ❑ PREV ❑ ROW
D LESS OCCU
U 6. NON-RES USE
G2� MORE PREV.
THAN 1 YR OCCU
T SPLIT
_A No. of Stories -� / LEVEL
B. BASEMENT 9 NO BASEMENT
SLAB C
A d % A L ON GR SPACEL
-
INT. WALL FIN.
PLG-
4
-�
HTG.
AIR COND
INSUL.
APPLIANCES
OTHER / JJ���,-
I
Y
f•[ �YL.�o-
- -
28. DIET. GAR. OR C. P.
S
I
29. WALKS, DRIVES
O
30. FINISH GRADING
31. PLANTING
32. OTHER ON -SITE
IMPROVEMENTS
33. ON -SITE IMPROV.
UNADJ.
•�J
ID
- -
1Q
No. of Living Units -o-
t t. a. Bed Rooms Z
• € b. Living Room
34. Gen. O'h'd'& Profit
�O
% } 100% X
35. Locality Adj.
O
% X
•
A
A=
12.1
.
13
A
c. Dining Room
d. Kitchen /
e. Other
f. No. of Rooms
a. Bath
b. Half Bath
GARAGE Built In
El Carport ® Attached
No. of Cars Detached
STORAGE OTHER
(DESCR.) -_
UTILITY
36. Quality Adj.
37. COMBINED ADJ.
38. ON -SITE IMPR. ADJ.'
39. ARCH. SERVICES
40. EST. REPL. COST
OF ON -SITE IMPR.
IN NEW COND. ;
/0 0 %
e
/o
_
`� - I
I B•
i Refrigerator
J to Range
a W Auto. Washer (Clothes)
O W
qce b
us
yr Q
41. PHYSICAL SECU- R.
RITY FEATURES
1
2
3
4
S
Rating
a. VISUAL APPEAL
OF PROPERTY
b. LIVABILITY OF
- PROPERTY
c. NATURAL LIGHT
AND VENTILATION
4
8
12
16
20
4
8
12
16
20
_
2
4
6
5
10
14.
UTILITIES
WATER SUPPLY
GAS
ELECTRICITY
SANITARY SEWER
SEPTIC TANK
15.
1Max. Perm.
Heat Loss (MPRI
0
_
C
o
b. Calc. Heat Loss
0
_
c. Est. Annual
Cost of Heating $
16.
a.
eD
o
b. Calc. Heat Gain
G
V
c. Est. Annual
Cost of Cooling $
Pub Comm Ind, Q 99 d. STRUCTURAL 4 B 12 16 20
4"QUALITY
e. RESISTANCE TO 2 4 6 8 10
ELEMENTS AND USE _
19 TOTAL VARIATIONS I. SUITABILITY OF 4 8 12 6 20 /!
ij MECH. EQUIPMENT (O
20. NET VARIATION
CE55 / g. RATING OF PHYSICAL SECURITY
POOL (Carry Forward) $ %f �9 r0
BTUH
43 MARKS 42. RATING CHARACTERISTICS
ppp�A'''Ly.�+•4 � w��!F�f✓
BTUH
BTUH
Chi L': RABLE SALE NO, 1 -
azC! „1 ;i: s (Location 3n rse &t ion ' subject )
ILDRESS: / / 5f - , -%-d
rJEGAL MOCRL"TION:
LAND USE: LAW SIZE:
i„)NING: e-" -
GRAMR:``''
CWTEE.:
SALE D:.TE:
unw- ter: w o
E. TAX NO. --IrwR 21 o }3
C•.�N:'IfVEDt
SA-E :'?'1cill, a
ADJ. FOR TIMEs
ADJ. SA: E PRICEs
ASALYSISs
LAND V.j,L'Es $
INCt SF
QRAGEs SP
76� -
LAID IMPRS. Est.of Cont.
To Value -
TOTAL
LAM AREAS
2 `%
LVmpk iME .SALE NO. 2-
PRDPHW DESCRIPTION ,.( Loceition in relation to aubject ):
ADDRE3Sc, : 610 Dales St., Edmonds- Snohomish. County, Wn. ^
Lc�.L DESCRIPTIONt Lot 3 and 4 Block 101 , al& � .
LAND USES
GRANTOR: C
q.R4iyTK6j Corp.of Catholic Arch.Bishop
S::LE D,172: 12/27/57
IN4131iM .r Ts WD /a A. K,.2 7
S, TAX NO.
COLTI WO
LPIW AREA:
C:3M?;.I'"TM AN=818:
SALE ?RICE: $ 6,000
ADJ.1I1R TD'Es
V LUE,
DWE,-.r,ING: :'s
Gk-WiUs ::F
OTJFAI
L,!'D rv-rO. ,,Lb-T.0 Con.
To VL'A ue —
Ta'PAL
COM-f-liRABLE SALE NO.
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION ( Location in relation to subject)
ADDRESS: _ /67 - G�,� ___---------------__
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: �r� /V A
LAND USE:�r
C`.R070R: i
GRANTEE:
SALE DATE:
INSTRUMENT:��
E. TAX N0.
CONFIRMED:
ASSESSED LAND VALUE:
LAND AREA
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS:
SALE PRICE: & ?a
ADJ. FOR TIME:
ADJ. FOR PRICE:
ANALYSIS:
LAND VALUE:
3?REI@LING: Sr
GARAGE: SF
OTHER:
LAND IMPRS.,EST OF CONST.
TOTAL TO VALUE _
31
COMPARABLE SALE NO.. Y
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION-( Location in relation to subject ): __.
ADDRESS: !vIle
_ �r
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:_
LAND USE:
ZONING:
GRANTOR: E�
MUM.- 4tt00
SALE BATE://S 7
INSTHKNT: WO / A 444,d ,9.75
E. TAX NO.:
CONFIRMED:
LAND SIZE: 1p4 k "IP
7/10
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS:
SALE PRICE: J�8oz>
ADJ. FOR TIME:
ADJ. BALE PRICE:
ANALYSIS:
LAND VALUE:
DWELLING: SF
$
GARAGE: SF
OTHER:
LAND IMPRS., EST.of CONST.
TO VALUE
TOTAL $
3C/
COTm2tiREu3 ,E SALE NO.
pRopEwr DESCRIPTION ( Location in relation to subaeot ) S
ADDRWS: O �' — �d �r2��C. . --
LEGAL DESCRIPTIONt
LAND USES
ZONINGS G
GRANTORt
GRANTEE:
SALE DATES
INST1�..N�S
E. TAX NO.
CONFIiK=s
AS:�ESSED LAND VALUES
LAND AREA
COKPA&INE kMYSISe
SALE PRICE: 5�vo a
ADZ. FOR TIME:
ADZ, FOR PRICE:
J:Najslss
LAND VAIUE
DEFOLING: SF
GARAGEt SF
OTNERt
LAND INPRS,,EST OF CONST,
TO VLu r
TOTAL
3S
C":,flIZLE 11"4L . NDa 4
?A-OP--,Ig Y DWCRI?TIONt ( TAomt�.-Rn in rallation to uu a ect )
"�MAL LE',:"S'TI•)N: PV.,ko
LAM VAS
7MYGt ro 9
c�'tP►t�'TaRt �. ��'�c,G
n � .i W1►g t?'
S. TAI No.
tr"'i s
SALE MICEt ���
ADJ• ITOR TI'.,'Es
ADJ. SALE 'RICEs
SISt
LMM V.4;Uy.t
QRAGEt
OF 4
vy-iff-LT
DWM.9 Eet.of Cunt.
To Val.ue-
��M
®,z &/, -// V7
EARL L. STAY
REAL ESTATE APPRAISER & CONSULTANT
j 1803 W. ISSTH STREET
SEATTLE 77. WASHINGTON
LI 6-1137
COMPARABLE SALE NO.______,_
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: ( Location in relation to subject )
ADDRESS: �l-.�i•�'��' �-� _
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:''�'� 9�
LAND USE:
ZONING: '►r -CrF
GRANTOR:
GRHtmn
SALE DATE:
INSTRUMENT:
E. TAX NO.
CONFIRMED: .
SALE PRICCE:
ADJ. FOR TTI�,
ADJ.SALE PRICE:
LAND SIZE: 6 t) " < 0 n
�tr1�r.�I pio�a a
ANALYSIS:
LAND VALUE:
DWELLING:
SF
GARAGE:
SF
OTHER:
LAND IMFRS., Est.of Cont.
To Value -
TOTAL
DwARATIVE ANALYSTS:-�
LAND AREA:
37
Cm,,, !? ._ss E SALE NOe f
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: ( Location in relation to subject )
Lf_QRi-'JSt
v
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: i /
ZONING: _d, 4.
GRANTOR:
CUNTEE z
SALE DATE:
INSTRUMENT: wO l 2,S7 o `f 7
E. TAX NO*
CONFI&NUM:
SALE PRIM �y4�
ADJ. FOR TIME:
ADJ.SALE PRICE:
X'LALM']IS:
LAND VALUES $ $
DWELLING: SF $
GARAGE: SF $
OTHERt
LAND INH'RS.p Eet.of Cont.
To Value— A
TOTAL $
COMPARATIVE ANiLLYSIS:
LAND AREA:
3k
COMPAWLE SALE NO.
PROPEM DESCRIPTION -(Location in relation to subject):
ADDRESS: 40
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
LAND USE:
ZONING:
GRANTOR:
GRANTEE: c,_ee
SALE DATE: .:
INSTRUXLENT: w ,-f i36 7
E . Tj� X No. :
CONFIRMED:
LAND SIZE:
LAND AREA:
GWARP,TIVE ANALYSIS:
SALE PRICE: lo, eoo
ADJ.FOR TIME:
ADJ.SALE BRICE:
ANALYSIS:
LAID VALUE:
DWELLING: SF
GARAGE: SF
OTHER:
LAND IHPRS.,EST.OF CONT.
TO VALUE
TOTAL
.3y
C a . - SALE ram. _ c
.M-1, DZSCRII-IlAt 'St�� E �✓�
L We'-;1-ca-
-ND
— At-
OVING
�•c�a` c
GIi[ ITIOR:
:ALE Dr-- 71
Il►STW i,T:
W0
E. TAX 50.
coymmme
E,XD St. Es
LAND Ai`- J_.
SALE FF M � /, 7Se>
AN a'OR T112i
ADd.SALE PRICE
DWZLLIHGs a =�
GAAAGZs ap
LAND DOW. # Est. of Cont.
Th Value —
TOTAL
i, _MP= 1 E. ;.aoatiion Ln rel-6tiJi, to imb j0ot .
k+ "�'M ' - + x-
v6
CObT ,.&,BLE StiLE NO.
ADDRESS:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: 2 y •�� �-�'. /O � �'`�
MD UM
]NING
GRILNTOR:
GRANTEE: z eW Gc
SALE DATE: f' / 8'
I1TOT17.1:M :
E. TAX N0.
CON y I RM:
Li MD SIDE:
LAND AREA:
070ee f/ 7/S
SALE PRICE:Y.7, ,Soe
ADJ.F'OR TIM
ADJ.SALE PRICE
LJ :
:,�XD VALUE:
DWELLIBG: SE
GARAGEt Sr
OTHER:
LAND IMPRS.9 Est -Of Cont.
To Value -
TOTAL
DP' I !1_?T )N: Location in relation to subject.
UA T VA r �LYSZS:
�1
-,.IF ..-tiz - -'Oct
DE�C'I?TVMl( LucAlon In re'- -n tj "ubj
246 Walnut St., Edmonds, Snohomish County., Wn.
Lots 1 -.&17 Block I24.- ► .�4 4z
ur-, So klzo��
MATO&
Philip W. Marshal].
'no bm la5:x-Z /,0
E, TAX NO.
GWARUTIT.",
IIUCE: $ 12s500
AL. J. R I,: ' I
C IT.
--'JUTI
ING: F
iw-A+Z t I-F
7
To V -SIP
Tnl
y -2-
COMPARATLE SALE 190. 43
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION*( Location in relatic
ADDRESS:
527 Maple St_, Edmonds,
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot 31 and E 20' of Lot 32 Block 121zcC
l
LAND USE: • 7 -,
ZONING:
GRANTOR:
GRANTEE: D.C. Lawson
SALE DATE: 9/28/59
INSTRUMENT: WD
E. TAX NO.
CONFI�HT: o Y�� J
LAND S1 : .�
LAND AREA: ,
CJ"filiLFb TIVE ANALYSIS:
SALE PRICE: $ 13.,000
ADJ.FOR TIME:
ADJ.SALE PRICE:
LAND VALUE:
SWELLING: Sr
GARAGE: SF ?'
OTHER:
LAND DIPRS.SEST.OF CONT.
To Value —
TOTAL
Y3
W i.Rl... SALE NO.�='
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION -( Location in relz:tion to subject ):
X.
ADDRESS: l /-- 3�
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: /`�6R.
LAND 1I;�E:
GIUMEE:"�'`�-
il.; DATE: y a
INST1�O+d'F':
E. TAX HO.:
ANALYSIS:
SALE PRICE: 4�3i .3oZd
ADJ. FOR TIME:
ADJ, BOLE PPSC-":
LAND VIME:
D! MLI"G: SF
GARAGE: SF
OTHER:
UND IMPRS.,EST.of CONST.
TO VALUE
TOTAL
yy
LAND
r COMPARABLE
ADD SS :
LEGAL_ DESCRIPTION: Z,-&; 7X J0
SALE NO► I f
LAND USE: C14r1r7 zE: a )(Me
ZONING:
GR!iiiTOR: e .P 'RICE, A 000
&RANTEE: PD. PLR IY,. FT.:
SALL DATE: ADJ. FOR TIME:
INSTRi7MENT • Wp I2� q 70 �-9 ADJ. PRICE:
E. TAX N0.: ADJ. PD. DQ. FT. :
C ONF IRNIED:
l
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Location in relation to subject;
Shape Loc.in block Lot Site Tract Acreage
Cld. Uncld, Covering
Topography
Grade at st• St.Surf. Curb S.W. Storm Sewer Alley
Water Sewer Elec• Tel. Conn• Avail.
Remarks: Soil, fill, drainage, frtge., access protect.# attrac-
tive., civic, social, com, cent., site imp., Bldge imp., etc.
Field Comp, Anal,
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS:
ys
LA ND�
COMPARABLE
ADDRESS:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
LAND USE:
ZONING: C 14
GRia:!TOR:
GRANTEE: L
SALL DATE:
INSTRUMENT:
E. TAX NO.:
CONFIMALD:
SALE NO. -/ 5e
S IZE:
AREA: �r-
I'RICE:
PD. PLR DQ. FT.:
ADJ. FOR TIME:
ADJ. PRICE:
ADJ. PD. DQ. FT.
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Location in relation to subject;
Shape Loc.in block Lot Site Tract l-�creage
Cld. Uncld, Covering
Topography
Grade at st. St.aurf. Curb S.W. Storm Sewer
Water Sewer Elec. Tel. Conn.
Remarks: Soil, fill, drainage, frtge., access,pratect.,
tive. , civic, social., core. cent., site imp,, bldg. iiiPs ,
Field Comp, Anal.
CUis PARATIn� AWALYSXS:
'11ay
<:vail.
attra c-
etc.
Y6
COMPARABLE SALE "TO 3
ADDRESS-.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:s��
LAND USE: SIZE:
ZONING: AREA:
GRI,_ITOR:PRICT:G'00
GRANTEE: ,J c 'ram PD. PT'2 IX,. FT.
SALL DATE: ��b�s`l ADJ. POR TIME:
INSTRUMENT: ADJ. � RICE:
E. TAX NO.: ADJ. PD. DO,. FT. :
CONFIRMED:
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Location in relation to subject;
Shape Loc.in block Lot Site Tract Acreage
Cld. Uncld, Covering
Topography
Grade at st. St.Surf. Curb S.1V. Storm Sewer Alley
Water Sewer Elec. Tel. Conn. Avail.
Remarks: Soil, fill, drainage, frtge., access,protect.# attrac-
tive., civic, social, com, cent., site imp., bldg. imp., etc.
Field Comp. Anal.
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS:
City of Edmonds 505 Bell Street, Edmonds, WA 98020
FAX
To:
Laresa Knowles
Legal Ads
The Herald
Phone:
Fax phone:
252-5613
CC:
Date: 12/19/96
Number of pages including cover sheet: $
From:
Sandy Chase
City Clerk
Phone: (206) 771-0245
Fax phone: (206) 771-0266
REMARKS: ❑ Urgent ❑ For your review ❑ Reply ASAP ❑ Please comment
Please publish the attached in the legal section of The Herald on SUNDAY, DECEMBER_2_2?1996,
AND, SUNDAY, DECEMBER 29, 1996 and bill the City Clerk.
If there are any problems during transmission or documents are received incomplete, please call me at
771-0245.
(RE: RFP/Finance Building)
City of Edmonds
Request for Proposals(RFP)
The City of Edmonds, Washington is in the process of developing its public
safety complex at the Civic Plaza and campus on Fifth and Bell Streets and
contemplates demolition of a building currently used as the Finance Department
of the City and located at the northeast corner of Fifth Avenue and Bell Street.
This one-story, 2,200 square foot structure was originally constructed in 1928
and used for a number of years as a Christian Science Church.
The City is therefore requesting proposals regarding this structure to be
submitted in writing to the Office of the City Clerk, 505 Bell Street, Edmonds, WA
98020, on or before 5:00 PM, January 14, 1997.
For further information, contact Paul Mar, Community Services Director, at 771-
0220.
Dates of publication in the Herald: December 22 and December 29, 1996.
TRANSMISSION VERIFICA
DATE J I ME
FAX NO./NAME
DURATION
PAGE(S)
RESULT
MODE
.a
no longer used, now the LTN Hazardous Materials Regulations are used. He pointed out construction of a
new rail line between Auburn and Easton has diverted creeks, damaged a hill and destroyed a waterfall.
Rich Demeroutis said the money received from rental of the Financial Center totaled $306,649 but the
interest on the bond during the 15 month period was $329,205. He pointed out the building would be
over budget, when it is only two-thirds renovated and still have the potential of collapsing in a major
earthquake.
4. AUTHORIZATION TO SEEK ARTISTS FOR PUBLIC SAFETY C,Q►NPLEX
K
Carolyn Stark, Chair of the Edmonds Arts Commission, asked the Council for authorization to seek
x artists for the Public Safety complex. It is desired to begin the process earlier to allow the artist to work
collaboratively with the project architects to design artwork that will integrate with the architecture. The
competition will be open to Northwest -area artists. Jurors will include a representative from the City
Council, Arts Commission, Architectural Design Board, Court, community, a professional art
consultant/artist, and the project architect. The two artists selected will prepare a submittal which will be
presented at a public hearing. The artists will be allowed to integrate suggestions made at the public
hearing prior to the jury reviewing their submittals. The Arts Commission will then approve the
submittals and present them to Council for approval.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT EARLING MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER VAN
HOLLEBEKE, TO AUTHORIZE THE EDMONDS ARTS COMMISSION TO SEEK ARTISTS
FOR THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMPLEX PUBLIC ART. MOTION CARRIED. (Councilmember
Myers was not present for the vote.)
Council President Earling encouraged Councilmembers who were interested in participating in the jury
to contact him.
Finance
6• HEARING ON OPTIONSR P N OF —THE CITY 0F ND '
BuildingFINANCE BUILDINGD AlL TO NON OFITR N ZATI
sm Bell St. IN D UB IN THE-EDMONDS CQMMUNITY
Mayor Fahey advised this item was placed on the agenda after conferring with the City Attorney
regarding how the City should proceed.
Council President Earling acknowledged the dilemma the Council is faced with regarding the building at
the corner of 5th and Bell. The Council's analysis of the City's budget reveals the $250,000 - $300,000
necessary for repairs to bring the building into compliance would be difficult for the City to find. The
Council is hopeful some way can be identified to resolve this dilemma to everyone's satisfaction.
City Attorney Snyder advised the purpose of this hearing is to create a legislative record for the City
Council prior to making a decision regarding whether to surplus the property. Constitutionally, the City
cannot give property away to individuals or charitable organizations regardless of the appropriateness of
their purpose unless the City receives consideration. Consideration can be in the form of public,
aesthetic, recreational, or educational benefits. The hearing is not intended to solicit firm proposals but
to determine whether there is an interest. If it is determined a public benefit exists, a procedure for
individuals/organizations to submit proposals should be developed.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 3, 1996
Page 3
0 0
rl
Louise Lindgren, Senior Planner - Historic Preservation, Planning and Development Services,
Snohomish County, pointed out Edmonds' Comprehensive Plan recognizes the strong cultural presence
and distinctive character. The City has a citizen -friendly atmosphere, which this building fits into. She
offered the facilities, resources, and contacts of the County Planning Department with other cities who
have faced preservation of an older building as well as plans for a civic center. She indicated the packet
she presented to Council includes information regarding preservation tax incentives for historic
buildings, designating cultural resources and a list of the benefits of cultural designation, special
valuation available to private owners on improvements, a list of the most commonly asked questions if
the building were placed on a register, the economics of rehabilitation versus demolish, and information
regarding the best way to move the structure without damage. She pointed out other communities facing
this same problem have considered a wide variety of adaptive reuses of a building such as ownership by
non-profit or commercial interests, shared use by community groups, or use as a museum for special
exhibits, art gallery, little theater, or church.
Kay Austin, State Office of Archeology and Preservation, explained she is one of ten employees who
provide service to communities and encourage preservation of historic properties. She has access to
resources to guide the City on what is significantly historic, what the best features are, and the best
solutions for properties such as the church which can assist the City in making its decision based on the
community, finances, etc. She pointed out the City's historic fabric is integrated in new construction,
open spaces, and the livability of the community. The combination of mixed uses and age helps
distinguish Edmonds from other cities and this uniqueness should not be easily eliminated. She pointed
out if the solution is to remove the structure, location is one of the character defining features of any
historic property. The church's relationship to the neighboring historic properties, new construction,
accessibility to the public, etc. have been in place since 1928. She pointed out it may be possible to
incorporate this structure into the "big plan" without moving it.
Student Representative Alex Moore asked Ms. Austin to elaborate on incorporating the building into the
plan for the new facility. Ms. Austin responded there are creative ways to incorporate significantly
historic properties with new facilities. She felt this could be done if the architect were challenged with
that option.
Mayor Fahey explained the County's Cultural Sites Inventory was an advisory list created to identify the
location of buildings with historical significance and did not place any restrictions on the building. She
opened the public participation portion of the hearing and reiterated the public was not asked to make
specific proposals for the use of the church at this time.
Darrell Marmion, 216th 4th Ave N, Edmonds, advised his home was moved from 4th and Bell to its
present location. He voted in favor of the bond issue but likely would not have if he had been aware the
church would be demolished. Other citizens were also not aware of the plan to demolish the church. He
noted one of the major goals included in the City's Comprehensive Plan is "to encourage the
rehabilitation and restoration of old buildings and historic buildings in order to retain a variety of
building styles and continuity with the City's past." He agreed with this policy and expressed concern
with statements that the church does not fit with the plans for the site. He felt the church defined the site
and other structures should fit around it. Although he spoke only for himself, he has heard similar
comments from other citizens. He suggested funds be eliminated from the scope of the Public Safety
building to preserve the church.
Norma Bruns, 816 Walnut, Edmonds, emphasized the policies of the Comprehensive Plan. She
learned at the last public hearing that the architect had not been shown the City's Comprehensive Plan
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 3, 1996
Page 4
which mentions the importance of preserving historic buildings and the character of the City. She agreed
saving the church site is equally as important as preserving the structure. She suggested the building
remain on the site and a few parking spaces or sidewalks be eliminated. She pointed out Council
candidates always want to preserve the small town quality of the City; retaining the church would be a
victory for the Council.
Charles LaWarne, 20824 Hillcrest Place, Edmonds, said he has served as a boardmember on the
Edmonds/South Snohomish County Historical Society and is also a member and current Chair of the
Washington Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, a panel of nine people appointed by the
Governor to advise on historic preservation issues. Speaking on his own behalf as a long time resident,
he hoped the City could find the means, funds, and desire to maintain the church in its current location
due to the areas surrounding the site such as the mound, the landscaping, the Centennial Plaza, the log
cabin, and the Carneige Library. Although the structure is not grand, it reflects the esthetic values of the
community —small buildings, pleasant and compact. He noted historic preservation for the purpose of
preserving old buildings as monuments is not enough —ways to use and renovate old buildings must be
found. Many older buildings are being integrated with new buildings to maintain the architecture,
similar to what was done to integrate the library with the Anderson Center. New buildings need not
overshadow old buildings, they can compliment them.
Rich Demeroutis, 921 Pine Street, Edmonds, asked what the museum society paid for rental for the
Carneige Library. Mr. Mar advised they pay $1 per year. Mr. Demeroutis pointed out the City maintains
the Carneige Library. He could support preservation of the church if it was done with donated time and
materials and not at the tax payers expense. He suggested the City sell the structure to the community
and possibly avoid bringing it up to Code. He pointed out this is not a church, it is a financial office. He
grew up across the street from the church and recalled a house built in 1915 that was demolished for the
Financial Center parking lot. He recommended "frivolous things" be delayed until the City has enough
revenue to maintain the waterfront, the rescue team and not charge the residents for transport to the
hospital in an emergency.
Al Rutledge, 7101 Lake Ballinger Way, Edmonds, said although the church represents family values
in the City, citizens must also look forward. He noted the City needs another motel and suggested the
church be renovated into a motel. If this was not possible, he favored leaving the building in place rather
than demolishing it.
Carol Hahn, 1031 2nd Ave S, Edmonds, recalled walking to school from 3rd and Pine and noted many
of the lovely homes have been replaced with apartment buildings. The church was part of her childhood
and she is beginning to mourn it. She favored the church remaining on the existing site as long as
possible and the public safety complex built around it.
Fred Bell, 21006 80th Place W, Edmonds, President of the Historical Society, but speaking on his own
behalf, said it would be a shame to see the church demolished. He hoped an agreement could be made
between community organizations to take over the building and maintain it in its present location. The
church could be the core of the historical district, along with the historical society located in the Carneige
Library, the log cabin, and the Centennial Plaza. He recommended the Council consider doing
something with the building other than demolition.
As there were no additional members of the public who wished to address the Council, Mayor Fahey
closed the public participation portion of the hearing. She clarified the bond issue for the public safety
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 3, 1996
Page 5
w 0
complex specifically indicated how the funds would be spent and could not be used for other purposes
such as renovation or relocation of the church.
Mr. Snyder requested the Council provide their assessment of what the potential benefits to the public
would be if the structure were retained and provide guidance regarding requests for proposals if the
Council should decide to surplus the structure in a manner other than an open bid.
Council President Earling respected the comments made by the public and stressed this is an issue the
Council is interested in and takes very seriously. He noted everyone feels passionately about this type of
building and now is the time for the community to step forward with proposals. He suggested proposals
be accepted in a time period of four to six weeks.
COUNCILMEMBER VAN HOLLEBEKE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
WHITE, TO EXTEND THE DISCUSSION OF THIS ITEM FOR FIVE MINUTES. MOTION
CARRIED, COUNCILMEMBER MYERS ABSTAINED.
Councilmember Petruzzi asked if allowing six weeks for proposals from the public would be acceptable.
Community Services Director Paul Mar said whether the building remains on the site is an important
factor as the current site layout does not include the existing finance building. If the building is removed
from the site, additional time may be available for coordinating the move. He concluded 5-6 weeks
would not be a significant time delay as the complex was early enough in the design stage.
Councilmember Petruzzi felt the building would have a great public benefit in the community although
he had difficulty visualizing it on the existing site. He suggested the Council move ahead with this
process.
Mr. Snyder said he could bring a request for proposals to the Council in two weeks which would include
when the proposals would be due, whether the structure is to be removed, the type of public use
proposed, analysis of the public benefit, and the proposed location if the structure is moved off -site,
including adequate insurance coverage. Councilmember Petruzzi pointed out the six week time period
would begin tonight and recommended interested parties begin work immediately.
Councilmember Myers asked if the $10,000 included in the bond for demolition could be used as funding
for alternate proposals. Mr. Snyder advised some funds would be necessary to fill the hole left by
removal of the building but the remainder could be available.
Council President Earling stressed a financial plan must be included in each proposal. Mayor Fahey
noted the structure and ambiance of the building can constitute a public benefit. Although the best
proposal would be one that retains the building as a public use, an option would be a for -profit business
purchasing the building for commercial use. She stressed all suggestions would be considered.
Mr. Snyder observed the Council comments indicated no City financial involvement is anticipated
beyond those funds provided in the bond issue for demolition and re -landscaping of the site.
Mayor Fahey thanked citizens for speaking on this item. She declared a five minute recess.
7Revenue
et 7. GQNTINUED HEARING_ ON 1997 BUDGET AND REVENUE SOURCES
Mayor Fahey opened the public participation portion of the hearing.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 3, 1996
Page 6
Item #:
• EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL
Agenda Memo
Originator: For Action: X For Information:
Subject: HEARING ON OPTIONS REGARDING THE DISPOSITION OF THE CITY OF
EDMONDS' FINANCE BUILDING (LOCATED AT 501 BELL STREET) TO
NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS FOR CONTINUED PUBLIC USE IN THE
EDMONDS COMMUNITY
Clearances: Department/Initials
Agenda Time: 45 Minutes
Agenda Date: December 3,1996
Exhibits Attached:
1. Memo from City Attorney, 11/27/96
2. Letter from Louise Lindgren, 11/8/96
• 3. City Council Minutes, 11/4/96
4. Letter from Edmonds South Snohomish
County Historical Society, 9/27/96
Admin Svcs/Finance
City Attorney
City Clerk
Court
Personnel
Fire
Police
Community Svcs
Engineering
Parks & Rec
Planning
Public Works
Treatment Plant
City Council
Mayor
Reviewed by Council Finance
Committee: Community Services
Public Safety
Approved for Consent Agenda:
5. Letters from Citizens (3) Recommend Review by Full Council:
Expenditure Amount Appropriation
Required: $ 0 Budgeted:_ $ 0 Required: $ 0
Previous Council Action:
At the City Council meeting of November 4, 1996, the Council discussed the possible preservation or
relocation of the "old church" building. They agreed that a hearing should be scheduled to hear optiolis
from the community about relocation and uses.
Narrative:
The construction of new Police, Fire, and Court facilities on the present City Hall site will necessitate the
removal of the current Finance Department structure, or the "old church" building on the corner of 5th and
Bell Streets. Upgrade and relocation of the building is too cost prohibitive for the City at this time.
Members of the community have expressed interest in preserving this building because of its age and
historical value. The purpose of the hearing is to consider any ideas from members of the community for
. the use and relocation of the building.
LI
0
Snohomish County Senior Planner/Historic Preservation Louise Lindgren and State of Washington Local •
Preservation Program Coordinator Kay Austin will present options and perspectives from the County and
State for our consideration.
Recommended Action:
City Council will take under consideration the proposals submitted and make a recommendation for action
to be taken regarding the relocation or preservation of the "old church" building.
Council Action:
M
WinWord6\Agenda961Church
0 3
•
•
11/Z1/NV 1►CU 1U;0D rya VUVr,11 DiLlAr111
TEEN
L�PHY CE P.L.L,<.. ATTORNEYS AT LAW
2100 Westlake Cenlcr Tower - 1601 Fi(dj Avenue sCattle, WA 98101-IM (206) 447.7(00 • Fax (206) 447-U215
MEMORANDUM
DATE: November 27, 199E
To; Mayor Barbara S. Fahey •1"9
Members of the City Council
City of Edmonds
FROM: W. Scott Snyder, office of the City Adorn
IRE: Options -- Disposition of Finance Building
On Tuesday, December 3, the City Council will hold a public hearing to review various options
based on proposals front community charital)le organizations for the disposition of the finance
building. The City Council will consider options to the demolition of the structure. One option
is to surplus the structure by pubJic bid. In addition to monetary consideration, the City Council
• could also accept consideration in the form of a continued community benefit from the
maintenance and use of the structure for the benefit of the Edmonds community.
The hearing is intended to permit community organizations to come forward and present ideas
and concepts to the City Council as opposed to specific proposals. in order to justify the
transfer of the structure, the Council must establish that the City has received a consideration
perhaps in the form of a public benefit in order to avoid a challenge that it has gifted public
property without consideration. Consideration may consist of money or of other public benefits
including but not limited to continuation and maintenance of a valuable historic asset in the
community coupled with public access.
As noted, the purpose of the hearing is to enable the City Council to determine whether
sufficient public interest and public benefit exists which outweighs the nominal, consideration
which the City might receive from a bid sale of the structure. If the City Council determines
that the building should be surplused rather than demolished, it will make a second determination
as to whether the proposal/bid process should be open and the City Council Compare monetary
bids with those proposing a public benefit nr limit the process to charitable organizations which
serve the Edmonds community which would maintain the structure in a public use for Edmonds
citizens. Following that determination, a resolution to surplus the property and establish a
request for proposal process would follow on a future City Council agenda.
W SSlgj z
WSs148748.1M/F0006,900001N80(106,
�3
%nulch" orra - Ode South Chelan street • P.U. sox 1606 • Wmamgda, WA QW • (509) 662-1954 + Fax (5W) 663.1$ti3
11-27-1996 11:51RM P.02
0 44S4*&
Snohomish Coun*
Planning and Development Services
Robert I Drewel
County Executive
'` ECEi V%D M /S #604
3000 Rockefeller Avenue
N O V 13 Everett, Wa 98201-4046
November 8, 1996 1996 (206)388-3311
OFFICE OF THE F,IAYDF FAX(206)388-3670
Mayor Barbara Fahey
City of Edmonds
505 Bell St.
Edmonds, WA 98020
Dear Mayor Fahey,
I have been contacted by a number of citizens regarding the City of Edmonds' plans for the
historic Christian Science Church. I have responded that the County's Planning and
Development Services office has an inventory of culturally and historically significant buildings,
structures, objects and sites that was published in 1980 (now being rewritten). The church has
been on the list since 1980.
The Cultural Sites Inventory is used as an advisory tool. When a property on the list is impacted,
our office offers services which can include discussion of alternatives to negative impact,
planning materials (books, periodicals, videos, etc.) which may prove helpful in finding mutually
beneficial solutions, resources related to funding, and contacts with other communities which
have faced demolition/sale/preservation issues and which have come up with creative solutions.
For instance, there may be some significant tax incentives if a business chooses to buy and move
the building, seek National Register status, and rehabilitate it (including ADA adaptations) up to
certain standards.
Please feel free to have your staff avail themselves of whatever help we can offer. I am at your
disposal from Monday through Thursday, 7:00 am to 6:00 pm. My phone number is 388-3311
ext. 2372.
Sincerely,
Louise Lindgren
Senior Planner, Historic Preservation
04 0
recycledpaper ea.,
0
estimated cost of $250,000 to up -date the building. The cost to upgrade and relocate the Finance
Building could exceed $300,000. At this time, only $10,000 to $15,000 has been set aside to cover
demolition.
Councilmember Haakenson inquired if there was any money in the bond issue that would allow for
upgrade of the building. Mr. Mar stated that all the money was accounted for except the $10,000-
$15,000 to be used for demolition.
Councilmember Earling stated that there has been considerable public interest in preserving the current
structure and that in the report it was stated that $40,000 would be needed to move the facility. He asked
if this figure has been confirmed. Mr. Mar stated that it was an estimate based upon discussions with
individuals who have recently moved buildings, but that there are variables such as how far it is moved
and the stability of the structure. Council President Earling asked if any citizen or group has come
forward with a plan, or suggested plan, on how to preserve the building. Mr. Mar responded that the
Historical Society came forward and applied for a grant application for moving the building, but when
they put all the numbers together they came to the conclusion that it would be too costly. Other
organizations have discussed possibilities with staff but no one has come forward with a business or
financial plan. Council President Earling stated that it appears that even if the building was left in its
present site it would still cost $250,000 to $300,000 to bring it up to meet code. Mr. Mar stated that this
was correct.
Councilmember Van Hollebeke asked if it was possible to surplus the building and offer it for $1 to any
organization or society that is interested in preserving it, and if there were any interested parties, could
the City try to help fund the move?
Council President Earling asked City Attorney Scott Snyder if the money set aside for demolition could is
used to help move the building. Mr. Snyder stated that if a specific set of criteria was adopted for
preserving the property for public use, and would be maintained for a certain numbers of years, there
would be a way to do that.
Council President Earling suggested that a Public Hearing be scheduled related to this issue and to
declare the building surplus. Scott Snyder, City Attorney, suggested that the Council declare the
building surplus and he would prepare a resolution for that purpose under a very specific set of criteria.
Any proposals that come in could then be reviewed and after that, a recommendation could .be made to
support the moving of the building and its preservation. Mr. Snyder stated he would bring a resolution
back to the Council which will be acceptable to the State Auditor.
11. MAYOR
Public Mayor Fahey stated the third public meeting to review plans for the design phase of the Police, Court and
Meeting -
Public safety Fire facilities will be taking place on Thursday, November 14, from 6:00 - 8:00 p.m. in the Edmonds
Facilities Library, and that all citizens are welcome and their input will be appreciated.
Mayor Fahey asked the Council to approve the appointment of James Chalupnik to the Architectural
Design Board. She stated that Mr. Chalupnik is extremely well qualified for the position.
ans COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER VAN
Appoiotmeat HOLLEBEKE, TO APPROVE THE APPOINTMENT OF JAMES CHALUPNIK TO THE
ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD. MOTION CARRIED. (Councilmember Petruzzi was not
present for the vote.)
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes •
November 4, 1996
Page 11
Attorney, reminded the Mayor and Council that ten or more spaces would require a conditional use
• permit.
COUNCILMEMBER MYERS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETRUZZI, TO
ADOPT THE RECOMMENDED PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO ECDC 16.45, 16.50 AND 16.80
AS RECOMMENDED BY THE PLANNING BOARD AND SHOWN ON EXHIBITS 1 THROUGH
3, AND DIRECT THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE AN ORDINANCE TO BE PLACED ON
THE COUNCIL CONSENT AGENDA ALONG WITH THE FORMAL FINDINGS OF FACT AND
CONCLUSIONS OF THE CITY COUNCIL. MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Petruzzi Ieft the meeting at 9:10 p.m. due to illness.
Financial 9. I C I❑ R T T
'Center 81JILDING REN!QVATIO
Building
Renovation
Paul Mar, Community Services Director, reported to the Council that as of midnight October 31, 1996,
all of the tenants of the Financial Center have vacated the building and the locks have been changed. Mr.
Mar stated that if he received authorization to call for bids tonight, advertising would be done
immediately, and the bid opening would be November 21. On November 26th, after staff has completed
analysis and verification of qualifications, he would come back to the Council to ask for the awarding of
the construction contract which could be done on November 26 or December 3. Once that is done, then
the notice to proceed with construction can be issued and the schedule would be met with construction
completed by the end of March 1997.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT EARLING -MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER VAN
HOLLEBEKE, TO AUTHORIZE STAFF TO CALL FOR BIDS FOR THE EDMONDS
FINANCIAL CENTER BUILDING RENOVATION. MOTION CARRIED. (Councilmember
• Petruzzi was not present for the vote.)
Furehase 9A. AUTHORLZATION
Surplus RENOVATED EDMONDSFINANQAL CENTERBUILPING
Furniture
Paul Mar, Community Service Director, explained that one of the tenants that vacated the building had a
surplus of furniture which was offered to the City for purchase. The staff worked closely with the City's
space planning consultant to evaluate the financial and functional feasibility of how these items could be
cost-effectively utilized by the City. Mr. Mar and the City's space planning consultant inspected the
furniture and felt it could be used effectively and that it was of good quality and condition.
Councilmember Myers inquired about the quality of the furniture. Mr. Mar stated that the City's space
planning consultant felt the furniture in the building was of a higher quality than what had been specified
in the current budget. Mr. Mar offered to review the quality and cost compared to the State purchase
catalog.
COUNCILMEMBER VAN HOLLEBEKE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
HAAKENSON, TO AUTHORIZE STAFF TO PURCHASE THE FURNITURE INVENTORY
DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT 1 FOR $10,000. MOTION CARRIED. (Councilmember Petruzzi was
not present for the vote.)
Finance 10. DTSCUSSION OF THE EXISTTNG FINANCEBUILDING AT 501 BELL STREET
Building -
so1 Bell St. Paul Mar, Community Service Director, reviewed the history of the building, and stated that it appears
that this particular building will not be part of the new Public Safety Campus, considering the age and
• Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 4, 1996
Page 10
`6 5
•
•
:. Q9bM0nb!5%0utb A*ttobomi!5 j
Coutttp A05t0ricai *P.&YNYED
I� to NON PROFIT CORPORATION, INC 1973 )
L P. O. BOX 52 G - P 2 '7 1996
EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 98020 i
EDMONDS CITY CLEF
J �
September 27,1996
EDMONDS HISTORICAL MUSEUM
118 - 5TH AVE N., EDMONDS, WASH. RECEIVED
Mayor Barbara Fahey and City Council Members
City of Edmonds SEP 2 7 1996
505 Bell Street
Edmonds, WA 98020 OFFiCE C~ tr,t MAY0p,
Reference: The Administrative Services Building
As a follow up to my letter of June 5, 1996, the Edmonds -
South Snohomish County Historical Society's Board of
Governors have investigated the possibility of moving the
building to a new location and renovating it to accommodate
the needs of the Museum. Our investigation included a
physical inspection of the building (see attached Inspection
Report), obtaining estimates for the purchase of a new site,
site preparation, provisions for parking, landscaping and
renovation of the building to bring it to code_ The total
cost of the project would be approximately $365,000.00_
Needless to say the Museum cannot assume such a debt load_
Although the Museum cannot proceed with the project, the
Board of Governors feel effort should be made to preserve the
building. Some, but not all, of many reasons for
Preservation include:
._the historical significance_. constructed in 1928 and
was the location of the first Women's Cultural and
Service Organization, known as "The Coterie Club"_
..the beauty of its architecture and landscaping.
_.ideally located near the Centennial Plaza, Log Cabin
and Museum.
__preservation of architectural heritage within the
Edmonds downtown area.
Not -withstanding the above, the Board of Governors suggest
forming a partnership with the City, which would keep the
building at its present location and allow the Museum to
maintain and renovate it to meet their requirements.
On behalf of the membership I respectfully request you give
favorable consideration to such a project.
Si ncpt_04 y ,
td O Bell ,
esident
G07
A SOCIETY TO PERPETUATE THE MEMORY AND SPIRIT OF OUR PIONEERS; TO IDENTIFY AND PRESERVE HISTORICAL
DOCUMENTS, RELICS, AND INCIDENTS: AND TO ENCOURAGE HISTORICAL RESEARCH. TODAY AND TOMORROW
H91i:;-c,3-9E. 04:48 i1 1-1 AP_ TEC Tt4 C. F: T HW E'=:T I1,11- ��k1 �.41 `+u:=:4 F' Ci=••
6
ARCHITECTS NORTHWESTS
1 August 1996
Fred Bell
Edmonds Historical Society
P.Q. Box 952
Edmonds, Washington 98020
Subject: Structural Investigation and Feasibility Study For Relocation/Reuse
of Former Church Building at Fifth Ave North and Bell Street, Edmonds,
Washington.
INTRODUCTION
The Edmonds Historical Society plans to acquire subject building from the
City of Edr-fonds and relocate it from its present site at the northeasterly
corner of 5th and Bell Street to a new vacant site located southerly across
Bell Street. We understand the Edmonds Historical Society plans to adapt
this structure for its administrative offices and to house museum artifacts.
Architects Northwest, Inc (ANW) has been retained to conduct a structural
inspection of the former church building described above and to determine
the suitability/feasibility of this structure for possible relocation and reuse.
Architects Northwest, Inc. has not been retained to conduct feasibility
studies of the receiving site, and accordingly, makes no claims or judgments
to its suitability. We strongly advise that site feasibility studies be conducted
if The Edmonds Historical Society desires to proceed with this project.
The purpose of this inspection is to evaluate the adequacy and condition of
the building's major structural components and to identify possible upgrades
and modifications that will be necessitated by its relocation and reuse. This
is a non-destructive inspection, that is; it is a visual inspection of building
components which are visible and accessible to the inspector and does not
involve the opening or expos ire of elements concealed from view. The
inspector was not able to access all areas of the crawl -space: due to limited
clearances and not all attic areas were accessible for, inspection. The
inspector was able to locate only one attic access Batch above the restroom
at the southwest. This attic hatch afforded a limited view of the building's
roof structure for that portion of the roof. Although no problems were visible
from these restricted vantage points, no judgments can be made for the
concealed inaccessible areas. It is recommended that once the building is
vacated that these remaining areas be exposed for inspection
•
•
18915 - 142nd AVF N F / 0,1 IITF 1 nil ln0nnninnIII i c 1niA none)
BUILDING DESCRIPTION
The building is a Period Style Church structure which was built at its present
location in 1925. It is a wood frame building on a poured -in -place concrete
foundation. The building is a single story building above mostly crawl -space
with a small basement beneath the southeast portion. The floor plan is
cruciforrr) in organization wilt) the nave and chancel (sanctuary) runnilig III
the north/south direction with the transept running east/west. The apse
(former altar) is located at the north end of the building. The building is
approximately 2,575 square feet, with 2,200 square feet occurring on the
main level with 375 square feet in basement. The building is composed of
intersecting 10112 gable roof forms with the transept serving as the principal
organizing element with the apse and nave framing into it with lower roof
forms. The building's maximum height is approximately 28'-7" above finish
grade.
The church was acquired by the City of Edmonds approximately 20 years
ago to house some of its administrative functions. The building's interiors
have been partitioned, and a suspended ceiling was installed over the former
sanctuary area to accommodate this current use. The City has made various
• upgrades to the building including, but not limited to; new 200 amp electrical
service with telecommunication capabilities, a new forced -air electrical
furnace, and has insulated the floors, roof, and had cellulose insulation blown
into the wall cavities.
NP IN
The building appears to have been well maintained by the City but has been
characterized as a maintenance burden by some of the City's maintenance
crews. There have been complaints of moisture and ventilation problems �
with occasional flooding occurring in the basement and crawl -spare. City
maintenance crews have complained of the exterigr paint flakinfy off the
siding necessitating the need to repaint the building every 2. to 5 years. This
is suggestive of the absence of a vapor barrier at the interior. Tkis-situation
may also be aggravated by the fact that the vents installed to vent the
blown in wall cavity insulation are clogged with paint The roof is
A�WpAAatefy-. vv-ent"ted with two ' (2) small transept gable -end vents'. The
crawl -space is minimally ventilated.
A possible source of the flooding may be that the building's r,20 Or.ain.,5 have
__AQ9f) discharging close to the building's foundation walls. Inspection of the
basement revealed Ovate-"'staiiiing at the base ot-the chimney flue suggestive
• of water penetration. No standing water was observed in the crawl -space
but efflorescence { l encrustation of soluble salts) was observed on the
foundation walls Suggestive of past water penetration., These water
9
•
BUILDING CONDITION (Continued) 0
problems would be eliminated if the building were to be relocated and the
down -spouts be collected and diverted to the City's storm -water system.
The composition oofing is in poor condition and is need of immediate
replaegnent. The composition raofii)g is Byer -laid directly above the originald
G, d OijUle roof .� Should this building be salvaged, it is recommended that
all the roofing he stripped -off and new roof sheathing be installed prior to the
installation of new composition shingles. It is recommended that additional
roof vents be installed at that time
The building siding is in poor condition, having been compromised by poor
ventilation and the absence of a vapor barrier. Should the decision be made
Q saly4ge this building, it is recommended that all the siding be replaced and
a suitable vapor -barrier be installed at that time.
The windows are single -patio windows and are generally in poor condition
with some painted shLIt and others with restricted operation. Should this
building be salvaged, these windows should be all replaced with insulated
units.
At the time of the inspection, a pest control person was on site to spray for
•
a moisture ant problem around the southwest corner of the building. It is
recommended that a comprehensive pest inspection be conducted in
conjunction with this determination. Dry -rot was observed in the crawl- �
spate at the northeast corner beneath the stairs -•and ...... dry=rot can be
anticipated to occur at other concealed locations given the moisture and
nti li a.pr.oblems associated with this building.
C�IJS C-D1y1D171�NS�
.was observed through -out the duct work both in the
basement and or) all the below floor duct work in the crawl -space. The City
has attempted to encapsulate this asbestos with an .unspecified spray -on
product. TI:"_sohAien-is intended to encapsulate the asbestos fibers in place
and is of dubious value were the ductwork to be disturbed.;
The is also the prospect of an abandoned oil tank cast of"the building There
may be the presence of contaminated soils once this tank is removed.
n
610
N
o=:i LIB-03-96 0..4:50 Hr9 o4RCHTTEC-'T' 11 DRTHWE'=:T lto- 'C:t Ci ;-1
STRUCTURAL DESCRIPTION
The building framing is composed of 2 x 4 frame walls with tongue & groove
wall sheathing overlaid with bevel siding. The interior walls are lath and
plaster. The roof is framed with 2 x 4 rafters at approximately 24 inches on
center with bottom chord ties occurring at 6 feet on center.- The main level
floor is -framed with 2 x 6 floor joists at 16 inches on center spanning 8 feet
north to south to 6 x 10 floor beams spanning approximately 8 feet on
center in the east to west direction. 1-he floor beams are supported by 6 x
10 wood blocks resting on isolated pad footings at approximately 8 feet on
center. There is approximately 12 inch clearance between the bottorn of the
floor beams and the earth. The building is supported by a combination of 5-
1/2 inch thick cast -in -place concrete foundation walls along with some
concrete masonry block foundation segments The floor joists appear to rest
directly on the top of the concrete foundation wall without a sill plate or
other visible means of anchorage.
ADAPTIVE REUSE ISSUES
Should the decision be made to salvage this building, the building shall need
• to be brought up to conformance with the latest building codes. These
codes include: Washington State Energy & Indoor Air Quality Codes, The
Uniform Building Code (seismic upgrades), Mechanical, Electrical, & Fire
Codes, and lastly the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements.
The combined requirements of these codes would necessitate substantial
upgrades to the building and are beyond the scope of this report
The requirements of ADA alone would necessitate enlarging the present
restrooms to twice their present size, the inclusion of ramps and railings, and
the elimination of all barriers, which in this case would entail the enlargement
of all door openings, new door hardware with levers, installing flashing alarm
lights, ....etc. I have included an excerpt of some of the ADA requirements
which would be applicable to this project. There are also Provisions for
Alterations to Historic Properties described in this literature.
BUILDING RELOCATION
We understand that the Edmonds Historical Society has solicited bids from
various contractors to relocate the building. We have not participated in this
process, but offer the following concerns. Building Movers fall under the
category of cerZ9 rnavers.w(th the State of Washington and are not required,!
• :,=a.<p�n�c;de liability coverage for any cargo they transport, nor can theyibe
held liagle for damage to cargo they transport. {The cargo in question here is
'"the bulldog. Accordingly to the laws of the State of Washington, should the
building collapse during the process of transporting it to the new location,
P. 05
rya_.....—uv— mac• �-� -. i Hill Hh'�_H I TEC'T'=: I4UF'THWE'°:T 0m41 -i
F . 0 r.
BUILDING RELOCATION (Continued)
the building movers are not liable for damages. The building mover would
only be liable for damage to other property owners resulting from negligence.
It is recommendcd that this issue be investigated further.
Prior to. relocating the building, a demolition permit must be secured from the
City of Edmonds, and a pre moving inspection must be conducted by
Edmonds officials. It is likely that the City of Edmonds will require a
Performance Bond to ensure that the site will be restored to their
requirements and that any damage to the City sidewalks, streets, or utilities
be repaired. Additionally, utilities must be disconnected, the sewer must be
capped. Trees and landscaping all along the existing perimeter would have
to be cut down and removed prior to lifting the building.
There are not any overhead power lines to the south of the building in the
intended path of the building, however, there is a light pole to the southeast.
There is a landscape island in the middle of Bell Street approximately the full
length of the church building to be moved This would necessitate that the
building movers would have to lift and shift the building to the; cast (towards
the adjacent building to the cast) to avoid this landscape island.'�<Tjlis would
require the removal of the flag pole, the free standing sign tothe east and
would no dolrbt cause extensive damage to the landscape to this adjoining
property_
Prior to relocating the building, a Building Permit must be secured to relocate
the building to its new site This would entail satisfying all zoning and land
use issues along with the building code upgrades described above.
Architects Northwest, Inc. has not been retained to conduct feasibility
studies of the possible receiving site and therefore makes no judgments as to
its suitability.
CONCLUSIONS
The existing building is presently in fair to poor condition The building has
long suffered frorn moisture and ventilation problems which has a deleterious
effect on the durability and .longevity of the building components. Large
portions of the building are concealed from view and accgrdingly not visible
for inspection and evaluation. The building is presently in need of a new roof
and gutters, new siding, and new windows in addition to the substantial L
upgrades necessary to bring the building in conformance with current codes
prg,Yiusly described.�..furthermore, the building has asbestos through -out the
ductwork.
•
•
612
r,
F, . 0 _,
•
•
•
CONCLUSIONS (Continued)
There will be substantial relocation costs avid potential liabilities associated
with physically moving the structure which must be factored into the
decision. You should anticipate con-)plex negotiations and permitting
requirements as well as the procurement of Performance Bonds prior to
proceeding.
I shall be pleased to discuss any aspect of this report or my inspection with
yourself or your board.
Submitted,
Marcel Desranleau, A.I.A.
Reviewed,
Jeffrey deRoulet, A.I.A.
Principle, Architects Northwest, Inc.
6-13
I_' 1 17t411 h' I HLAt'vT 114.- 'k1 r_ r; 1 .ii: :-{
..od Okt V i • �••� / Fes' Y r
A CHITEL.TB
NORTHWEBT
w
vf�v � L4 l L, i k-i 6f F'L,,�c, F,4
•
•
0
Nov. 20, 1996
Barb Fahey, Mayor
City of Edmonds
pz-cl�l v
Nov Z 1
or
rve i996
At one of the meetings called to explain and discuss the new fire -police complex, a
speaker involved in the project reminded us that "this is Edmonds, not Bellevue,"
suggesting that we have different priorities.
I agree, having lived in both communities. If an historic church building were located on
property deemed for development in Bellevue the only question would be whether it was
going to get in the way. And if the answer was yes, it would be razed with little or no
debate.
I assumed that in Edmonds the challenge posed to architects and planners would not be
"Will this church interfere with the overall plan?" but rather, "Show us how this project
can be completed without the removal of such an attractive landmark."
I urge you and the council to view the project in this light, especially since forced removal
of the church would violate the spirit of the comprehensive plan approved so
enthusiastically just last year.
John and Alice Owen
611 Bell St. #4�
Edmonds 98020
61
•
Mayor Barbara Fahey
All City Council Members
City Center
Edmonds, WA 98020
Dear Mrs. Fahey and Council Members,
RECEIVED
0 C T 3 1 Bags
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR
As a citizen of our community, I am very concerned about the current
councils' disregard of the Historical value of the former First Church of Christ
Scientist building. This building was listed in 1980 on the Cultural Resources
Inventory "List as having value to Snohomish County history. Does this not mean
that the City must get permission to destroy such a building? To quote the Fall
1996 issue of the Snohomish County Heritage Perspective "...the survey and
inventory process benefits the community by recognizing the enduring values of
historic structures, objects, and sites. Such recognition honors the contributions
of the past, anchors our future and links one generation to the next." Do you
know so much more than those who pondered many other sites before deciding to
raise this building to this status? If the new designs do not fit in with what is an
integral part of our City, then perhaps the new designs should be revised. The
"look." and "charm" of Edmonds has always been the "little Churches on the
corners". Newness does not have to be synonymous with style that is out of
context. This has been my town for almost 25 years. It's where I live, where I
work, where I volunteer and where I vote. I have been in far too many places that
have "modernized" themselves out of any personality whatsoever. PLEASE don't
do this here.
Sincerely.
L7� d- I vet"7
MAWS. VanMeter
P. O. Box 1676
Edmonds, WA 98020
CC: The Everett Herald
The Edmonds Paper
C
0
C
•
E
.l • DO ",LAS S. EGAN
518 BELL STREET #201 • EDM
Yamais am1re
omp I _
IIR
".
Nov. 9th 19996
Mayor Barbara Fahey
Edmonds Civic Center
Dear Madam Mayor ;
At least two articles have appeared in our local papers about the little
city building at the corner of 5th and Bell streets. A building of
considerable vintage, and charm, a segment of Edmonds heritage, that is
threatened by destruction by City father; and mothers,
About twenty four years ago another city building was threatened in the
same manner, the Carnegie Library Building. It was saved by a small
group of citizens and converted into a Historical Museum. I believe that
citizens generally agree, that the Historical Society and the Museum
have earned a prominent place in the cultiural life of our city.
American cities are more than just a group of buildings. All across our
nation, there is a resurgence of efforts to preserve segments of our
heritage, be it an old ship, a building or perhaps a piece of property,
Our Historical society view the little church building and its setting
as an important segment of our heritage and if allowed to stand we will
make whatever sacrifice necessary to preserve and protect it for
posterity at the same time making use of it as a museum annex,
The thought of a parking lot to replace it is to me revolting, facing as
it would, our beautiful Centennial Plaza. The little building is so
very nicely situated amid attractive landscaping, and will lend dignity
and beauty to to the scene. Its use as a Museum Annex will be a positive
contribution to the Historical Society.
Earlier this year, Edmonds citizens supported your efforts to construct
a new building concept on this property, now it is my hope that this
concept with some compassion on your part may make it possible to
include this bit of Edmonds heritage.
Sind r+�y ,
D u l a an
Historian and Curator.
c-22-b,
1 �� s,l p'I � �, d��•1 S'
Attorney, reminded the Mayor and Council that ten or more spaces would require a conditional use
permit.
COUNCILMEMBER MYERS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETRUZZI, TO
ADOPT THE RECOMMENDED PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO ECDC 16.45, 16.50 AND 16.80
AS RECOMMENDED BY THE PLANNING BOARD AND SHOWN ON EXHIBITS 1 THROUGH
3, AND DIRECT THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE AN ORDINANCE TO BE PLACED ON
THE COUNCIL CONSENT AGENDA ALONG WITH THE FORMAL FINDINGS OF FACT AND
CONCLUSIONS OF THE CITY COUNCIL. MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Petruzzi left the meeting at 9:10 p.m. due to illness.
Financial 9, AUTHORIZATION To CALL FOR 811DS FOR THE EDMONDS FINANCIAL ICENT
Center Building BUILDING RENOVATION
Renovation
Paul Mar, Community Services Director, reported to the Council that as of midnight October 31, 1996,
all of the tenants of the Financial Center have vacated the building and the locks have been changed. Mr.
Mar stated that if he received authorization to call for bids tonight, advertising would be done
immediately, and the bid opening would be November 21. On November 26th, after staff has completed
analysis and verification of qualifications, he would come back to the Council to ask for the awarding of
the construction contract which could be done on November 26 or December 3. Once that is done, then
the notice to proceed with construction can be issued and the schedule would be met with construction
completed by the end of March 1997.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT EARLING MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER VAN
HOLLEBEKE, TO AUTHORIZE STAFF TO CALL FOR BIDS FOR THE EDMONDS
FINANCIAL CENTER BUILDING RENOVATION. MOTION CARRIED. (Councilmember
Petruzzi was not present for the vote.)
Purchase 9A. AUTHORIZATION TO PURCHASE SURPLUS FURNITURE TO MEET THE NEEDS IN THE
Surplus RENOVATED EDMONDS IINANCIAL CENTER BUILDILG
Furniture
Paul Mar, Community Service Director, explained that one of the tenants that vacated the building had a
surplus of furniture which was offered to the City for purchase. The staff worked closely with the City's
space planning consultant to evaluate the financial and functional feasibility of how these items could be
cost-effectively utilized by the City. Mr. Mar and the City's space planning consultant inspected the
furniture and felt it could be used effectively and that it was of good quality and condition.
Councilmember Myers inquired about the quality of the furniture. Mr. Mar stated that the City's space
planning consultant felt the furniture in the building was of a higher quality than what had been specified
in the current budget. Mr. Mar offered to review the quality and cost compared to the State purchase
catalog.
COUNCILMEMBER VAN HOLLEBEKE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
HAAKENSON, TO AUTHORIZE STAFF TO PURCHASE THE FURNITURE INVENTORY
DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT 1 FOR $10,000. MOTION CARRIED. (Councilmember Petruzzi was
not present for the vote.)
Finance 10'
D15CUSSI!QN OF THE EXISTING FINANCE BUILDING AT 501 BELL STREET
Building -
501 Bell St, Paul Mar, Community Service Director, reviewed the history of the building, and stated that it appears
that this particular building will not be part of the new Public Safety Campus, considering the age and
Edmonds City Counc# Approved Minutes
November a, 1996
Page 10
0 0
estimated cost of $250,000 to up -date the building. The cost to upgrade and relocate the Finance
Building could exceed $300,000. At this time, only $10,000 to $15,000 has been set aside to cover
demolition.
Councilmember Haakenson inquired if there was any money in the bond issue that would allow for
upgrade of the building. Mr. Mar stated that all the money was accounted for except the $10,000-
$15,000 to be used for demolition.
Councilmember Earling stated that there has been considerable public interest in preserving the current
structure and that in the report it was stated that $40,000 would be needed to move the facility. He asked
if this figure has been confirmed. Mr. Mar stated that it was an estimate based upon discussions with
individuals who have recently moved buildings, but that there are variables such as how far it is moved
and the stability of the structure. Council President Earling asked if any citizen or group has come
forward with a plan, or suggested plan, on how to preserve the'building. Mr. Mar responded that the
Historical Society came forward and applied for a grant application for moving the building, but when
they put all the numbers together they came to the conclusion that it would be too costly. Other
organizations have discussed possibilities with staff but no one has come forward with a business or
financial plan. Council President Earling stated that it appears that even if the building was left in its
present site it would still cost $250,000 to $300,000 to bring it up to meet code. Mr. Mar stated that this
was correct.
Councilmember Van Hollebeke asked if it was possible to surplus the building and offer it for $1 to any
organization or society that is interested in preserving it, and if there were any interested parties, could
the City try to help fund the move?
Council President Earling asked City Attorney Scott Snyder if the money set aside for demolition could
be used to help move the building. Mr. Snyder stated that if a specific set of criteria was adopted for
preserving the property for public use, and would be maintained for a certain numbers of years, there
would be a way to do that.
Council President Earling suggested that a Public Hearing be scheduled related to this issue and to
declare the building surplus. Scott Snyder, City Attorney, suggested that the Council declare the
building surplus and he would prepare a resolution for that purpose under a very specific set of criteria.
Any proposals that come in could then be reviewed and after that, a recommendation could be made to
support the moving of the building and its preservation. Mr. Snyder stated he would bring a resolution
back to the Council which will be acceptable to the State Auditor.
11. MAYOR
M
Mayor Fahey stated the third public meeting to review plans for the design phase of the Police, Court and
g -
safety Fire facilities will be taking place on Thursday, November 14, from 6:00 - 8:00 p.m. in the Edmonds
es Library, and that all citizens are welcome and their input will be appreciated.
Mayor Fahey asked the Council to approve the appointment of James Chalupnik to the Architectural
Design Board. She stated that Mr. Chalupnik is extremely well qualified for the position.
nna COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST
Appointment HOLLEBEKE, TO APPROVE THE
ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD
present for the vote.)
MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER VAN
APPOINTMENT OF JAMES CHALUPNIK TO THE
MOTION CARRIED. (Councilmember Petruzzi was not
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 4, 1996
Page 11
11. COUNCIL
Council President Earling reminded Councilmembers that they needed to have questions for staff
regarding the budget turned in by Friday and that Art Housler, Administrative Services Director, would
be meeting with the Council at 7:00 p.m. on November 12 to discuss the budget.
Councilmember Van Hollebeke stated that he had attended numerous meetings regarding the Edmonds
Alliance for Economic Development and that a great deal of progress has been made in the last few days.
terry Dook Councilmember Nordquist inquired about the status of the appeal to the building of the overhead loading
Overhwd ramp at the ferry dock. City Attorney Scott Snyder responded that Phil Olbrechts from his office
Loading attended the pre -hearing conference. Mr. Snyder commented that the permit is for the State to justify.
Ramp p g Y P j fY
He believes the role of the City Attorney's Office is to be sure that they honor the conditions from the
hearing process. Mr. Snyder further commented that Ms. Shippen substantively did not have any
requests; the import of her case appears to be that she would like to have the case remanded to the City
Council for another hearing in Edmonds. There is a settlement negotiation aspect of that first pre -
hearing conference that would require the concurrence of WSDOT. Because WSDOT has already
received their permit, he would be surprised to see WSDOT come back to a hearing in which they could
lose and then have an appeal that would add another 6 to 8 months to their process. Mr. Snyder asked
that if the Council would like his office to take a different role with regard to this matter he would
appreciate their input and direction. When a matter is not a city -initiated request, it is the burden of the
applicant to continue forward, and the role of the City Attorney's Office is to make sure if they have
made representations or have agreed to a series of conditions before this Council, to make sure those
conditions remain in the permit.
Appeal/ Councilmember Nordquist inquired further about the Verhey appeal (fencing on Ocean Avenue). Mr.
Fencing on I Snyder indicated a report would be made to the Council when a decision has been made. The matter is
Ocean Ave.
between the State and WUTC, and his office is not taking a prominent role. Community Services
Director Paul Mar reported the formal hearing on that appeal was held on October 29. It is his
understanding that the hearing board will issue their decision in 60 days.
Mayor Fahey mentioned that Councilmember White was not in attendance at tonight's meeting as he is
recovering from surgery.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:37 p.m.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
November 4, 1996
Page 12
Item #: Q
EDMONDS CITY COUNCT L
Agenda Memo
Originator:
Community Services Director For Action: For Information: X
Subject:
DISCUSSION ON THE EXISTING FINANCE BUILDING AT 501 BELL STREET
Clearances: Department/Initials
Agenda Time:
15 minutes Admin Svcs/Finance _ Community Svcs
City Attorney Engineering _
Agenda Date:
November 4, 1996 City Clerk Parks & Rec
Court Planning
Exhibits Attached: Personnel Public Works
1
Fire Treatment Plant
Police City Council
2.
_
Mayor
3.
Reviewed by Council Finance
Committee: Community Serviees
Public Safety
•
Approved for Consent Agenda:
Recommend Review by Full Council:
Expenditure
Amount Appropriation
Required:
$ 0 Budgeted: $ 0 Required: $ 0
Previous Council Action:
None.
Narrative:
Over the past several weeks, City Council and administration have received written and verbal requests to
"preserve" the Finance Building, located at 501 Bell Street. The October 26th edition of The Herald featured a
lengthy article on this topic. Early this summer, the Edmonds -South Snohomish County Historical Society
approached the City about the possibility of acquiring the building to accommodate the Museum's space needs. Staff
has not received any other formal functional use requests for the Finance Building. Staff is aware that several
organizations are searching for space, including the Edmonds Arts Festival, Edmonds Chamber of Commerce and a
newly formed non-profit arts organization.
Background
The Finance Building was constructed at its present site in 1928. It has 2,200 square feet on the first floor and a 375
square foot basement. It was built as a church. The City acquired the building in the 1970's. Staff estimates that the
40
City has invested about $200,000 in tenant improvements, including electrical and plumbing upgrades over the past
0 0
ten -to -fifteen years to house the finance and accounting functions of the City. With the recent acquisition of and the •
soon -to -be renovated Edmonds Financial Center Building, these functions will relocate to the newer facility.
Does the building have a functional use as part of the new Public Safety complex?
The City began developing conceptual plans for the Public Safety complex in early September, 1996. Based on
these initial site layout options, it has been concluded that the Finance Building will not be a functional part of the
Public Safety complex. Costs for demolishing this building are included as part of the Public Safety project budget,
about a $10,000-to-$15,000 allowance. Based on the most up-to-date schedule, demolition would occur in late
summer or early fall of 1997.
"Preserving" the Finance Building on the site may adversely impact the City's ability to meet code required parking
and/or require the City to apply for a lot coverage variance for the Public Safety project.. The maximum lot coverage
in a Public(P) zone is 35%. The land area is slightly less than 100,000 square feet. The preliminary public safety
complex building footprints total is a little over 30,000 square feet. If covered parking is part of this project or a future
phase, this would add to the footprint.
What is the cost for providing the necessary upgrades to enable a functional use?
Over the years, the City's Facilities Maintenance Section and various consultants have analyzed the facility upgrade
requirements for the Finance Building. From the late 1980's until 1995, the City maintained a five-year upgrade plan
for the Finance Building as part of the Fund #116(Building Maintenance) capital replacement plan. As mentioned
earlier, about $200,000 was expended during this period. As part of the 1992 Civic Center Space Needs Study, an
ADA compliance analysis of all the Civic Center buildings was done. Most recently, the Historical Society hired a
consultant to physically inspect the building. •
Staff estimates that it would require about $250,000 to meet all of the code requirements and to get the building ready
for a viable functional use. Staff has also estimated that it would cost slightly under $40,000 to move the building to
another site.
Conclusions
1. The Finance Building is not an integral functional part of the new Public Safety complex development.
2. "Preserving" the Finance Building at its current location may have adverse impacts on developing the Public
Safety complex.
3. The cost for upgrading and relocating the Finance Building could exceed $300,000.
4. The City does not have any funds to cover even a minor portion of this effort, except as a deduct to the demolition
cost($10,000 to $15,000).
Recommended Action:
None
•
�
V
y:
r`N
m0 m u0 u
NO o
y0
00
I
Ip
O
O
O
O O
O�
O
O
O
O
O
0 0
0
0
0
0D
❑W
C7 1 C
DHD
o
O
a
o
O o
0
0
0
0
0
0
O W
3
N
N
N
N
LA
UI
LA
a
a
m
m m
m m m
Cq
w
co
CA i
C5
m
a
0
m m
co
coa
W
m
N
r
P
U
N
0 co
P
Li
P
O
J
P LA
a
z
A
r
{ 0 J
Cq
H
H
T
T
T
to
m
r
S
H
n
H H
H
3
O
s
'• \
D O
,Zx1
z
D T
T
T
Z
WH
Ic
T
J
p
n
-�(
7. 7.
7.
7.
O
D
z
n
H H
�' r
F;
W
r
m
ii
J' 1.10
y
m
T
Y
r `I 0�
H
C,
�
m
m
0
r
z
�7
O
x
E
o
acn
m
z I z
T
o
z
2
m m
z
T
C
H
}
J
z
N @
to
O
T
m
1
W
W
O
X
;r 7T
C
T
m
m
H
0
m m
r
T
CC7
3
0
"
H
2
@
T I
T
T
3
z
C
N
-i I -�
m
z
�
H
r
D
C7
--I
r
r r
D D
T
D
O
r.
W
C
z
H
O
H
H H
O O
-I
O
tom
EnD
z z
T
m
D
. I
M
z
z i z
x
m
@
n
�
OH
z
l
a
z
o
z
m
D H
z
-<
7
m
O
n
D
ri z
G5
-i
r
a
r
D
H H
D
z
D
v
-I
{
m
D
m
-i
o
`a
r
czi
@
z
D
d
T
<co
T
C H
()
7.
C
T
7;
m
z
z
1
�
4
Cl
C
(n
!J C
N
z
C
D
C
z
w
T
hl
T
C
z
0 C)
H H
11
H
-C
O
3
D
r
O
@
D
z
m
z z
A
n
X
H
7
z
D
n
D
n
1
z
t C
H H
N
2
U1
{
T
r
n
D
o
x
z
H
D o
D
o
o
>
7.
o
0 �
H
z
T
m
E
-+
H
m
H
z
m
m
z s
z
o
C
@
�
z
m
m
£
z
W
0
z
m
m
o
s
c z
N
N
m; m
19
m
T
a
z
z
7
t+
'" H
N
'rDi
r
r
-+
H
r
m
7
z
H
z
z
z
T T
:�
D
T
@ {
Ul
H
r�
H
D
i,
m O
z
2
Ij
z
z
T
-1 .l
@
H
@
n
m
o
D
{ o
7.
l
0
D
I
-i W
coG)
{
O
T
I
i
C
f
a
D a
A
a
a
y Z
m
m
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W W
W
W
W
-I
W_
W
W
r
W
r
W
O O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O O
O
O
O
T
rHi
r
\
r
\
\
\
\ \
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
W W
W
co
@
co
co
CD
co
co CD
O
I
W
O
W
O
W
O
0)@
O
O
co
O
O O
O
O
O
.O
O
O
O
O
H
n
I
m
1
W
N
O
I
N
Lq N
a
N
W
p
W
r
N
N
�0
=
o
P
'J
W
m
O
W
�0
0
0 co
r
O
0
D,
a)
'
N
N
O
O
P
r
0
J
'J a
�0 I CD
rJ
A
CD
LA
P
�0
O
O CA
J
r
W
O
N
O
W
N
A A
d
A
J
J
�0
0
J
O W
O W
O
O
W
W
@
O
P
�0
W ! W
W
W
a
O
W
i.
i
t
a
W
W
O
o
10
o
O
o
0
O
o
O O
a
O
o
0
O
r
C
r
F.
N
CA
rJ
L?
O
r
O O
O O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O O
O
O
O
T
D
e
0
P'
Dm
Om
.1
J J
Jm
m
C
A
C
\
W 0
\ \
N
\
W
\
P
\
T
O
\
\ a)\
J
\
\ \
Na)
W
\ W
{
P
r
J TO
O W
o
W
N
7\
W
p a
0 a
O2�
W O
O r
O pp
4m �i1m
0 1
�4N
r
W
IJ
'JO
0
P r
P �
r
D
D T
W
e
Om
\;�
Dx
\N
\FJ
\ W ■a)
\ O
O
r
W
\W
\ \
ol
\
\
\
�T
OL
@;T
4 0
p\Cl
0
� N
j 1J � ram-
'00 0
O
O
@
O D.
J
W
C9
a
E{
+
O!D
00
0
i
Bi S9
32
0 f3
r
�
�
o
`4
G
I
1937338
N
W
OFFICIAL RECORDS
K
0
ou'c
O
W
uj
VOL- OF
PACEEc�I3©
cc
I'i:i�. nt
a
d
Vf54
=
o lit'7 NIAP
AUDITOR -
16
�wli{1Nll-5iA L; ' �
I
z
Iti,
W
V
v,z0z
z
~
W
a
Q
U)
3
`0
�3 •s,
- ti
W
�
H
0
V
LL
m
�
~
W
N
O
ti
W
o
m
cid
�
N
.�
W
c
Z
a
/fx
0
z
a
F
u
�o
NZ
V
A
m0
�••I w
R
0
i�-+
cd
4a
cn
Z
Hr
^
r
v.,
o
41
'�-
4 1
rl)
^
Q
O
O
U3
U
O
A
rd
•a
,o
o
0
^
�
z
u•
^
�+
q
W
o
U7
41
f4
O
U
V
E--r
u
Li
U
x
v
C4
H
cd
o
U
[
41
C13
i 3
G'
�° o -a
cd
c
va
rd o
b
0�4
v
O
w
rd
W
� r
y
1.0 G
!�cet
i
•S
M c
U9
d ^
^m
O rd
4 a,
W ^
4-1 4J
O�
>1a
� 4-4
U O
cA
H
I --I
U
v ra x
� �JH
QJ w °
o � .
Ei oV0
�Q
wy
t`
rn
Ln
V T N
r
Nd
r
� � d
N
y
GLr
v
n
'1i
4
4J v ♦+
�
U
a+
Ca
Cd �'
�
tiro
w �
a
co
G
4'
W
w o �
',
°
w �
l
�
r 4
E-5
July 8, 1983
MEMO TO: Harve H. Harrison
Mayor
FROM: Steve Simpson, Director
Parks and Recreation Department
SUBJECT: SCHOOL DISTRICT BALLFIELDS IN AND ADJACENT
TO THE CITY OF EDMONDS
The City Council, recognizing that the city's six softball fields and
one soccer field are not suitable for additional development, has asked
the Parks and Recreation Department to survey school district owned fields
in and adjacent to Edmonds. The resulting inventory is attached here.
You will see from the survey that none of the city's elementary schools
are suitable for additional development. College Place Middle School,
Woodway High School, and the proposed Meadowdale Playfield all probably
could be developed without major negative impact on surrounding neighborhoods.
Edmonds High School also is an attractive site, but we expect it to be fully
scheduled by the school district once field improvements now underway are
completed.
Conversations with Dr. Reasby, school superintendent, indicate the
school district would be interested in discussing joint development of
the Woodway or Meadowdale sites.
i
SOS/ls
Attachments
32 31 30 29 28 27 23 24 23 22 21 20 IB 17 16 IS I+ 11
— .
ImN 1448- $ �
777N SW r• •`
SCHOOL DISTRICT
BALLFIELDS
l
UZI-
F
-t"o TH Gt T `r a F,1�Mo1� 17 5 �wY'j k '51
-
'r
1T-K
N,3
r3
•N�
a.3
:
KIy
g-
32 71
30
29
2e
27
26
25
74
23
22
24
19
1e
17
Is
15
14 13
emo
N
0
V) Z
m O
J M:
w M
�-- w
L.�
J LL
J O
Q
00 >-
w U
O3 C)
U Z
f + w
U
F— Q
N '7
Q
J �
O Z
O Q
U Z
b
a) U
r
4- rn
Y
{..)
V)Cl-
r
3
r �
b r r
s`
a)
c
O
O 41 • r N �
>y
D_
r
to C Q1 rO
r-
^
V)
t 4- E
Q) C
U O •r
r6 L
C aJ
r
4 ` O QJ
L r-
to +J C to
L +J a) ut
O O U
U
ra
O a) .0
C to O
O O +3 > m
C C a) r-
4-) Cl. O
=3 S.-
U a) U
U (A
ro -a
4--
O
}) ro D_
7 U
its •r >� 1
a) cm C r 4--)
D_ r a)
E a) U
in
-0 a) r
-0 r
r O a) D_ C in
Q> Q U a--)
•r •r •r
U- i-)
V)
-
V1 ro
aJ a1 -0
C D E 7
O N m O
() U
C
U r
Y U C 0)
Y ro
ro • L
Q)
E
•r •r r
to r- :3
U ^ }� L O
ro V1 S` O
E a) D_
S`
O
3
r
Q1
O O
r O 4-
S- V1 O O
L a-' -0
a) S-
r- > O
•r
r
O -W a)
U O, V) C
S` U C S- r6
=3 a) 4-
L
4-•) O in
a) ro •r a)
O to
3 >)
a) r-
U r
O
C r O
O D_
-0 Y 4- in
r S- 4- S-
-0 r—
Sr O C
U ra
0-0
in
S- m
-0 ro C_0
r0 m O
U r d�
a) O O
4- -C
V1 4-•)
4-
_0
a)
O t •r r-
O Y 7
S- in U
a--) a) 0-0 ro
4- S_ a)
() O
>
0) (31 S_ O
c +- . +J r- a)
-0
U in
r
O
S_
-0 r0 3
i O
O S- a) r-
r ra a) >y'r
L ro
S- 0)4-)
4-) -0
U a)
D_
E
aJ a)
4--- E U
r- 4- r- 4-
a) -0 ro a)
O •r •r
O a)
ro X
L •r
r
C
4- 7 C C
7 0 S•• a)
U O U Y O i-)
x O O •r 3 •r
a C rn
a E
co 3 4- IL
w C 3 r r- F— 3
0
0
0
0
0
0
(!�
0
0
0
J
O
O
r-
O
O w
ro
r
L
L
2 LD
w
U
Sr
O
<
F-
N J
J >)
E
LLJ�
Q C) r-
O
_
a)
Q
F-
Ill
E
r-
Q U
Q C
Z
J
r-+ F-
w r
w r
•r
w r
J •r
w >,
U r
w >> +.•)
U r r
w 4-
w 4-
4-
a
Q •r
a �U E
C
ra
ro
1
O
4-
4- ^
U (U
3 a)
O a)
w i
Lu r N U
w r
3 r
C•: •r
C3 •r M r
d 0)
C
►-+ Q)
>.0
w 0)
J C
w 4-)
J r-
w 4-)Z O)
J r C)
>-
J rn
win
-::C in
C E
C) E cm V)
C>
U..
Uw
--�
N
M
if) 1.0
eno
1
N a) N
Q)
C4-)
E'r-
•r L
O
^
•r
ro E
aJ
+1
4-) aJ
C7) •r +�
a) +
O U i
4-) +•1
ro r
i U
r
r0 O
S .r
-0
L L 7
a)
i ds
•r •r
7r-
i +)
04-
-0 •r
r0 r0
O O C
:3
0) a)
0) O
() -0 -0N
4- O O
N O
•r i E
C
L O 4)
_0 0) U
r
a) ro Ql
• r
N i 4-
• r a--)
N
C r r-
>>
O a O
Y O 4--) i
_0-0
i ro
Q N
C O a)
r Q)
r O
eo E
r N
i C 'D
a) Q)
r0 v i
of
ro i U
O a--) C
•r C
ti r -J CD-
Q) a)
C• r O ro
4- O N 7
4-
4 ro
i E
rb +� 4- d
.O •r
_0
C Qr >>
C N
ai
r-
a) • r r
+)
r a) _0
+�
Q� a)
-0 +-) a)
Q)
r +-) 010
i O (6
= •r
• r •r Y
-0-0
ro O 0—
r0 a) r•
O W
N E• r
a) Q)
E a a) a)
+) 4- a
Q) r
4- 0)
i
C O
i a) 4-
O 7 C
ro ()
>> a1
N -0 •r C
^
E
C Q)
i r0 U 4-)Y
i
a--� aJ
0)
OL
Q) a) U >)=
_0-0 i O
C+>
> L-0
r U
> i O ro 0)
C O (0 4-)
a) ro
O Q) r
+) (n
ro N E •r
ro 0 0_
r U
i 4- O
ro
N i
(7) 3
r- o
L 4- O
E
r r a) _0
r E O
(3)
a--) 7 3
i
r0 U r- a)
r a) O C
U
O Q)
r (1) 4•3
b> i
X >>
N a
4- N
r 4-) 4--/ 'r (0
E (0 4- N
a) r
r a1 N
C
a) C U 4- :3
N-C •r
r-
C
•r
•r a) ro Cy-N
N ro
N •r O
4- -0 i i a)
-0 N N
V) i a)
N 4--) C
Q) r
r d Q) -0
r (1) (1) r
Q) 4-) U
Q) L r
i a)
Q) N L ro
Q) -0 U QJ
U C C
U +� QJ
'r U
U a) a)
U X
4-
CD i 4-) O •r
� NQLL-
Q U4-
Q W-04-
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
J
Q
J
>-
C)
O
Ck�
Or
Z
C
O
Q
2 rb
W
O
S
F-
U •r
�
•r
U
Z
L/1) U
W
Cn
W
i
J
a:
Qj
W
LU
E
c
(-D
E
W
rd
0-+
w
S O
]G
W S-
u
Q
U -P
cn
(n \
J
Z
>-
O
O 4-
Q C-0
Q
O
Z N
W
•r a)
3
3
O \
L/)
W N
CD
of �
4-
Q 4-
d 4- O
O 4-
W 4-
D E
S N
(n N r-
O N
S N
LLJ
W
3
(n —
1�
00
Q1
O
010
Y'v
C
3 r O
.0
r0
E
O r Q1
-0 ro
x
O.�
C
(D a--)
Y: 4-U
r
a
E =
i
a) X
+' w
O C
_0 Ln ro
c
O N
U
-P —
r0 d
r0 w w
N N
O
aJ i
i 0
d E
O
U U
O U O
O rp =
3
4- -o
L i U
u + ro
3 O
4-
i r
i-� rU
i '-
aJ a1
r
a) E
U
1p
w
•r- v1
X _0
ai N
--c S.
.- U
W C
3 4-
�.a�
ro 4-
r0 r
O a
O'
C C
C O
>;.-
r4 L
r
3 r r
Q) a)
U
.J
r
O O ro
_0 0-0
ro ro
4-
4-
O L
a) U V)
t/) ro
i
a,�
4- r
7
�
r a)U
+� Q1
= OU
m 3� =
O •r C
CO2 ra
0
00
00000
0
m000
0
1
1� 0
a�
O
a
ofS-
C)
i
O
O
2
i
O
2
U
N
�
J
U
Lf)
Y
2
CD
W
r--
Li-
W
J
Q
F--
S
}
Q
0
C=l
2
C'3
Z
W
Z
O
d
2
W
J
r-+
W
W
W
LLJ
Q
=D
Q
O
Q
0
Q
W
F-
r--r
O
O
O
U)
Z 4-
Q 4-
Q 4-
_
Q 4- c~/)
O N
L.)
W V)
W VI
W (n W
m- i�
N
r- q
M
r1
.--I
LO
r•-1
to
r-4
September 8, 1983
MEMO TO: Harve H. Harrison
Mayor
FROM: Linda M. McCrystal, Acting Director
Parks and Recreation Department
SUBJECT: REVISED POLICIES AND PROCEDURES FOR
ATHLETIC FIELD USE
Attached are the City of Edmonds Policies and Procedures for Athletic
Field Use with the revisions requested by the City Council at their
August 30, 1983 meeting:
1. Minimum of 25% use by adults.
2. No scheduled play before 9:00 a.m.
3. Use of east softball field at Civic Center
Playfield for scheduled time only.
4. Increased fees for non-resident use.
The compromise we have reached does not completely satisfy either the
neighbors nor field users. I recommend that the solution be given a
year to work in and be evaluated again at the end of the 1984 summer
season.
LM/mw
Attachment
l�
CITY OF EDMONDS
POLICIES AND PROCEDURES FOR
ATHLETIC FIELD USE
The Parks and Recreation Department established this Field Use Policy to:
1. Manage the limited number of city athletic fields.
2. Insure all user groups are given a chance to schedule the use of
city athletic fields with priority given to Edmonds residents.
3. Provide a partial repayment of the costs of maintaining and scheduling
of city athletic fields.
4. Protect the rights of neighbors of city athletic fields.
SCHEDULING PRIORITIES - Priority use will be granted to organizations with
ricesTn ws in order of priority:
1. Youth "Leagues" with 60 percent residency.
2. Adult "Leagues" with 60 percent residency.
3. Returning Youth "Teams" with 60 percent residency.
4. Returning Adult "Teams" with 60 percent residency.
5. New Users with 60 percent residency.
6. Returning Users without 60 percent residency.
7. New Users without residency.
*Residency = 60 percent of a team's or a league's members must reside in
Edmonds and/or Edmonds School District.
NOTE: Adults will be scheduled for a minimum 25 percent of available
field time.
SCHEDULING PROCEDURES
1. All requests for field use by Leagues must be submitted in writing to
the Athletics Coordinator.
2. Requests for field use by Teams are handled at a field scheduling
meeting. Team managers must be present to receive field time.
3. Fields are scheduled for three periods each year:
FALL (Sept. -Dec.) - football/soccer field
WINTER (Jan. -Apr.) - football/soccer field
SPRING/SUMMER (May -Aug.) - softball/soccer fields
Field scheduling meetings are held 30 days before the beginning of
each period. If weather or city maintenance prohibits the use of a
field, the City will try to reassign teams to other suitable times
or fields.
4. The City reserves the right to limit the amount of play permitted on
the facilities during any program period. There will be no scheduled
play before 9:00 a.m. Beginning and ending dates for field use will
be established by the City for each period.
5. Use of the east softball field is for scheduled time only. Unscheduled
users must play on west softball field.
6. Teams/leagues must submit a roster, showing residency of the players,
to the Athletics Coordinator.
9/83
POLICIES AND PROCEDU, FOR
ATHLETIC FIELD USE - Paae 2
FEES AND CHARGES
1. Fees and charges are assessed for use of all facilities to partially
offset administration and operation costs.
2. Fee Schedule:
RESIDENT NON-RESIDENT
Softball/Soccer Fields - $2.50 per hour $5.00 per hour
Soccer Field with Lights:
Youth Play - $4.00 per hour $6.50 per hour
Adult Play - $6.00 per hour $8.50 per hour
3. Collection of Fees:
Payment is due one week prior to inception of scheduled use.
Checks are payable to the Edmonds Recreation Department.
4. Refunds:
No cash refunds, except:
a. When the City cancels/closes the facility.
b. When the participant moves away from South Snohomish/North
King County. Proof of the move must be shown when the re-
fund is requested. Refunds will be made only for time
scheduled after a refund request is made. A $1.00 process-
ing fee will be charged for the refund.
c. Refund Credits, good for one year from the date of issue,
will be issued when a refund is requested before the second
scheduled date.
RULES AND REGULATIONS
1. Alcoholic beverages and other drugs are prohibited by City Ordinance
in public parks and playing fields at all times.
2. Smoking is prohibited on the playing fields.
3. Dogs, horses and other pets are not allowed on playing fields.
4. A Parks and Recreation Concession Permit is required for sale of any
goodsor services in city parks or playing fields.
5. Organizations and individuals using city fields must leave them in
satisfactory condition. Maintenance fees will be charged to groups
who damage fields.
6. Athletic field users must stop all play by 10:00 p.m. (soccer field
by 9:00 p.m.).
7. Excessive noise, anti -social activity or obscene language/actions,
as determined by field neighbors and city staff, are not acceptable
on city fields. Blatent violation of community standards for prudent
and acceptable behavior is cause for loss of field use privileges and
forfeit of fees (no shouting or swearing). The Staff and Planning/Park
Board will be the final judges of disputes over acceptable behavior.
8. Vehicles are to be parked in designated public parking areas only.
9. The Parks and Recreation Department/City of Edmonds is not responsible
for accident, injuries or theft.
10. The misuse of city property or failure to abide by the above rules is
reason for suspension and denial of further use of playing fields.
September 23, 1983
MEMO TO: Harve H. Harrison
Mayor
- 3 ...
VIA: Stephen 0. Simpson, Director
Parks and Recreation Department
FROM: Linda J. Sullivan, Landscape Designer
Parks and Recreation Department
SUBJECT: REPORT ON VARIOUS BALLFIELD SIGHTS
At its August 23, 1983 meeting, Council asked Parks Department staff to
discuss possibilities of joint School District/City use of athletic
fields at Woodway High School. Since then, District and Parks Depart-
ment staff have discussed the sort of facility mutually desirable there
and the steps needed to develop such a field. Here are the highlights
of the talks to date:
LOCATION OF FIELD
Woodway's existing baseball field, at the south end of the school
grounds (see map), is the best candidate for joint use. The
school's football field would not be suitable because of the
district's requirement that it remain in turf grass. Turf would
not hold up under the heavy use a joint agreement would bring.
TYPE OF FIELD
With improvements, the area mentioned could accommodate a softball/
baseball field and a practice soccer field.
IMPROVEMENTS NEEDED
New soil, grading, and drainage.'
Bleachers, fencing, and backstop.
Lights.
Rest rooms. (There may be utility hookup material in nearby building.
See map.)
Cost of these improvements could be in the $200,000 range.
I M
REPORT ON VARIOUS BALLFIELD SIGHTS
MAINTENANCE
The School District probably would favor an agreement similar to its
contract with the City of Lynnwood for Lynnwood High School. Usage,
simplified, comes down to this: After 6:00 p.m., the city takes
over the field. In case of conflicting needs, the school district
prevails. With the Woodway field, conflicts would probably be in-
frequent and would be on the order of major school events like
graduation.
Discussions continue among representatives of the School District, Lynnwood
and Edmonds regarding the proposed Meadowdale Playfield. Staff will be
making a presentation on the Meadowdale Playfield to the South County
Chamber of Commerce on September 30.
G%6t,�t1rR-.�
LJS/mw
E n t r Y
I
� rq 4 k ''..:• ' p O � e �
a o �f p 11•I II �� o o g 0 g a fl q vc a
leIe o 0 0 o
'i )I' u , 4: �C� t•
'+a�jo���ttl �! G �� , i I ��•. `Ji .C'1 •O��l''OV��..i.��J_:..
I' �1'•{1i 1.' j I III I .I I' it •5,1.
!I` o 0 I�r` 4:'�' - .•• - _ — � � 0
1.: , ! � jjl I I ' , � � I I I ' I I ��I I I �!11- '. � �• 1 � ! ' ��ti�7��•ti :�5'1 t�\�� ` 11 ' •e/ O
■
' _:pit !^.�, .■ t• i yt � 5. .•,• �! i .
P a rkIngIS
_ :v;:4
•2 � � y �, e e
.e u ,,,,,,,��r,�rtl.W,riiy,uG�lluuu�nll..• �Q 9 6 �
Preferred sited-
Op
_ I 9
•r, r7 +` a �, o ©a ' o. 0 '9 � `J . f o ,G a,o I�,.q; � ;,- �:, �' ,4f{ t I� Id':� 0 �,4�
': f, t ,4 �� _� , ' t•i h���" �3 �F7 � u 'r� H ti3 , O G i ��'•� � �_$,_�. •
�w Res1dentiai area /.
WOODWAY HIGH SCHO
0
CITY OF E D M O N D 5 HARVE H HAR MISON
AYOR
MAYOR
700 MAIN ST • EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 98020 • (206) 775-2525
PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT
September 12, 1983
Dear Neighbor:
Following a meeting on June 23, 1983, neighbors near the Civic Center Field
recommended some changes that could help resolve the conflict between field
users and nearby residents. I'll try to summarize what the City has done to re-
spond to your requests.
1. Request for two- or three-year plan to provide additional facilities.
The City is working on cooperative use agreements with the City of
Lynnwood and the Edmonds Schcol District to develop lighted playing
fields at Woodway High School and the Meadowdale School Site. Both
sites would have minimal impact on surrounding areas.
2. Request to relocate the baseball diamond and bleachers to the west
side of the plaufield.
The City allowed the field to be moved to eliminate the hazard of soft-
ball players looking into the evening sun. The softball field is the
only adult softball field in the City. Adults use the field during
later daylight hours so are most sensitive to the problem of low sun
angles. The City, therefore, cannot recommend moving the field to the
west side again. The City has restricted play on the east softball
field to scheduled time only. This will eliminate much of the noisy
play by organized, drop -in teams. In addition, a youth -sized field
will be built on the west side that will reduce the amount of play on
the field further. Young people play earlier in the day and are not
as sensitive to the low light angle problem.
3. Request to change the scheduling from seven-day use, to operate the
field from 10:00 a.m, to 9:00 p.m., and to schedule Saturday exclusive-
ly for children. In addition, no scheduled play on Sunday.
The soccer field is now scheduled until 9:00 p.m., Monday through
Friday. No games are scheduled after 5:00 p.m. on Saturday, or any
time during Sunday, except for quarterly tournaments. The softball
field is now scheduled until dusk, Monday through Friday. No games
are scheduled after 5:00 p.m. on Saturday, or any time during Sunday,
except for quarterly tournaments.
4. Request for a 4-way sto�p at 7th and Bell or Daley to control s eed.
The Engineering Department is doing a traffic study to see if such a
stop is warranted.
CIVIC CENTER FIELD CHANGES
September 13, 1983 - Page 2
5. Re vest to p2st rules of conduct at conspicuous locations.
Rules were posted in July at the east and west entrances.
6. Request that priority go to school age children and local residents.
The City has for at least four years given priority for scheduling to
children and local residents. The field is School District property,
therefore the City gives School District residents the same priority
as City residents. The City does give the Edmonds Softball Association
priority on the east softball field. This field was built and is main-
tained by that group. It is not sized for children's play.
The City is making a sincere effort to mitigate the conflicts around the
Civic Center Field. Since some of these measures were made late in the summer,
you have not yet seen the positive results.
The City is in constant touch with the other municipalities to keep abreast
of policy and technological changes that can help solve these problems. We try
our best to satisfy all citizen requests.
The compromise we've reached does not completely satisfy either the neighbors
or field users. I believe the solution should be given a year to work in and be
evaluated again in Summer, 1984.
Sincerely,
� � r
Steph n O. Simpson, Direct
Parks & Recreation Department
SOS/LM/mw
we _ _to- X
September 29, 1983
MEMO TO: Harve H. Harrison
Mayor
FROM: Stephen 0. Simpson, Director
Parks and Recreation Department
SUBJECT: HEARING ON REVISED POLICIES AND PROCEDURES
FOR ATHLETIC FIELD USE
Attached is the City of Edmonds Policies and Procedures for Athletic
Field Use with the revisions presented to the City Council at their
September 13, 1983 meeting.
The revisions summarized are:
1. Minimum of 25% use by adults on fields suitable for
adult play.
2. No scheduled play before 9:00 a.m. on any athletic
field.
3. The east softball field at Civic Center Playfield
is for scheduled use only. The field can be scheduled
at Anderson Center.
4. Fees for non-resident use are increased by $2.50 per
hour.
Both neighbors around the Civic Center Playfield and players are
being notified of the Council Hearing set for October 4.
Attached also is a letter sent to Civic Center Playfield neighbors
on September 12, 1983.
SOS/mw
Attachments
d'M
CITY OF EDMONDS
POLICIES AND PROCEDURES FOR
ATHLETIC FIELD USE
The Parks and Recreation Department established this Field Use Policv to:
1. Manage the limited number of city athletic fields.
2. Insure all user groups are given a chance to schedule the use of
city athletic fields with priority given to Edmonds residents.
3. Provide a partial repayment of the costs of maintaining and scheduling
of city athletic fields.
4. Protect the rights of neighbors of city athletic fields.
SCHEDULING PRIORITIES - Priority use will be granted to organizations with
resi ency*, as follows in order of priority:
1. Youth "Leagues" with 60 percent residency.
2. Adult "Leagues" with 60 percent residency.
3. Returning Youth "Teams" with 60 percent residency.
4. Returning Adult "Teams" with 60 percent residency.
5. New Users with 60 percent residency.
6. Returning Users without 60 percent residency.
7. New Users without residency.
*Residency = 60 percent of a team's or a league's members must reside in
Edmonds and/or Edmonds School District.
NOTE: Adults will be scheduled for a minimum 25 percent of available
field time.
SCHEDULING PROCEDURES
1. All requests for field use by Leagues must be submitted in writing to
the Athletics Coordinator.
2. Requests for field use by Teams are handled at a field scheduling
meeting. Team managers must be pre, ent to receive field time.
3. Fields are scheduled for three periods each year:
FALL (Sept. -Dec.) - football/soccer field
WINTER (Jan. -Apr.) - football/soccer field
SPRING/SUMMER (May -Aug.) - softball/soccer fields
Field scheduling meetings are held 30 days before the beginning of
each period. If weather or city maintenance prohibits the use of a
field, the City will try to reassign teams to other suitable times
or fields.
4. The City reserves the right to limit the amount of play permitted on
the facilities during any program period. There will be no scheduled
play before 9:00 a.m. Beginning and ending dates for field use will
be established by the City for each period.
5. Use of the east softball field is for scheduled time only. Unscheduled
users must play on west softball field.
6. Teams/leagues must submit a roster, showing residency of the players,
to the Athletics Coordinator.
9/83
POLICIES AND PROCEDUt._, FOR
ATHLETIC FIELD USE - Page 2
FEES AND CHARGES
1. Fees and charges are assessed for use of all facilities to partially
offset administration and operation costs.
2. Fee Schedule:
RESIDENT NON-RESIDENT
Softball/Soccer Fields - $2.50 per hour $5.00 per hour
Soccer Field with Lights:
Youth Play - $4.00 per hour $6.50 per hour
Adult Play - $6.00 per hour $8.50 per hour
3. Collection of Fees:
Payment is due one week prior to inception of scheduled use.
Checks are payable to the Edmonds Recreation Department.
4. Refunds:
No cash refunds, except:
a. When the City cancels/closes the facility.
b. When the participant moves away from South Snohomish/North
King County. Proof of the move must be shown when the re-
fund is requested. Refunds will be made only -for time
scheduled after a refund request is made. A $1.00 process-
ing fee will be charged for the refund.
c. Refund Credits, good for one year from the date of issue,
will be issued when a refund is requested before the second
scheduled date.
RULES AND REGULATIONS
1. Alcoholic beverages and other drugs are prohibited by City Ordinance
in public parks and playing fields at all times.
2. Smoking is prohibited on the playing fields.
3. Dogs, horses and other pets are not allowed on playing fields.
4. A Parks and Recreation Concession Permit is required for sale of any
goodsor services in city parks or playing fields.
5. Organizations and individuals using city fields must leave them in
satisfactory condition. Maintenance fees will be charged to groups
who damage fields.
6. Athletic field users must stop all play by 10:00 p.m. (soccer field
by 9:00 p.m.).
7. Excessive noise, anti -social activity or obscene language/actions,
as determined by field neighbors and city staff, are not acceptable
on city fields. Blatent violation of community standards for prudent
and acceptable behavior is cause for loss of field use privileges and
forfeit of fees (no shouting or swearing). The Staff and Planning/Park
Board will be the final judges of disputes over acceptable behavior.
8. Vehicles are to be parked in designated public parking areas only.
9. The Parks and Recreation Department/City of Edmonds is not responsible
for accident, injuries or theft.
10. The misuse of city property or failure to abide by the above rules is
reason for suspension and denial of further use of playing fields.
