The URL can be used to link to this page

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.