Loading...
110 PINE ST (2).pdfCITY OF EDMONDS NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING JMKW WILL HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING v 19 , ON THE FOLLOWING APPLICATION: PROPERTY ADDRESS AND LOCATION ZONE DISTRICT 1 THE HEARING WILL BEGIN AT • M., IN THE PLAZA MEETING ROOM, LIBRARY BUILDING, 650 MAIN STREET, EDMONDS, WASHINGTON. IF YOU WISH TO COMMENT ON THIS PROPOSAL, YOU MAY COME TO THE HEARING AND SPEAK. YOU MAY ALSO WRITE A LETTER STATING YOUR VIEWS WHICH WILL BE CONSIDERED AT THE HEARING. PLEASE ADDRESS THE LETTER TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND INCLUDE -THE ABOVE FILE NUMBER. IF THE ITEM IS CONTINUED TO ANOTHER HEARING BECAUSE THE AGENDA IS NOT COMPLETED, OR FURTHER INFORMATION IS NEEDED, THE DATE OF THE CONTINUED HEARING WILL BE ANNOUNCED ONLY AT THE MEETING. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION MAY BE OBTAINED AT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, 250 FIFTH AVENUE NORTH, EDMONDS (PHONE 771-3202, EXTENSION 252). THE REMOVAL, MUTILATION, DESTRUCTION, OR A I N G! OOF THEAOF ( HEARING S A MISDEMEANOR PUNISHABLE BY FINE AND IMPRISONMENT. THIS NOTICE MAY BE REMOVED AFTER i q 77 p5 -a � 3/246 p STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ss. COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH ) Duane Bowman and says: FILE NO. APPLICANT AFFIDAVIT OF POSTER V-9-87 Sydney Locke being first duly sworn, on oath, deposes That on the 20th day of March , 1987 , the attached Notice of Public Hearing was posted as prescribed by Ordinance, and in any event, in the Frances Anderson Center and Civic Center, and where applicable on or near the subject property. Signed •� Subscribed and sworn to before me this c,?O 15-4 day of 19-. Notary Public in and for the State of Washington. Residing at 42.�. MY C MMISSIow EXPIRES 6-16-89- 0 FILE NO. V-9-87 APPLICANT Sydney Locke AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ss. COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH ) Susan Painter being first duly sworn, on oath deposes and says: That on the 20th day of March ,19 87 , the attached Notice of Public Hearing was mailed as required to adjacent property owners, the names of which were provided by the applicant. Signed ,(,�?� �Q,t�►1J Subscribed and sworn to before me this ap 4z� day of ..J 19�. Notary Public in and for the State of Washington. 1 Residing at�� MY, COMMISSION EXPIRES 6-16-89. 1 �. � ,� :� r � t. _ .< -- ,. �. tFfi �. _,_.. __ .r. �. -' THIS PACKET SENT TO HEARING `-' EXAPIINER ON MARCH 27 , 1987 EXHIBIT LIST V-9-87 EXHIBIT 1 -STAFF REPORT EXHIBIT 2 -APPLICATION/DECLARATIONS EXHIBIT 3 -SITE PLAN &VICINITY SKETCH EXHIBIT 4 -BUILDING ELEVATION EXHIBIT 5 -PRELIMINARY PLAT #S-33-86 A.I,hra.,.=; 1dr.�.�r.,._,._c t.�w .o ua.. y.a,.,,t-..........au,�..,...�.........,.,.e.__..�,.o..S.........:�.ssS.....+�a_..�.,._,. _.. ., ..I _._ _.... _ ._., ...,....`._......,u. .. .,......_._�..,,..a._.�u.,... .....»c... ....,..r. ._..�.......,. ,.L,.v ... .. .. .,.. ... ...,«_ .� EXHIBIT 1 STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER FILE: V-9-87 HEARING DATE: April 2, 1987 I. REQUESTED ACTION: Variance to increase the height for a proposed residence from 25' to 35' at 110 pine Street, Edmonds. II. APPLICANT/OWNER: Sydney Locke 1402 N.E. 155th St. Seattle, WA 98155 III. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot 1, Block 4, South Park Addition to Edmonds, according to the plat thereof, recorded in Volume 8 of Plats, page 13, records of Snohomish County, Washington; EXCEPT the west 115 feet thereof; and, EXCEPT that portion thereof conveyed to the State of Washington by deed recorded under Auditor's File No. 2175124. IV. STAFF FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: A. Description of the Subject Property and Surrounding Area The subject property is located on the southeast corner of the intersection of Pine Street and SR 104. On December 1, 1986, the City granted preliminary approval for a two lot short subdivision on the subject property under file #S-33-86. The applicant is proposing to build a residence on the proposed Lot 2 of that short subdivision. The Applicant is seeking a variance to allow the proposed residence he intends to build to exceed the permitted height limit of 25' by 10'. Surrounding development is single family residential to the south and east. Edmonds City Park is located north of the subject property, across Pine Street. To the west is SR 104. B. Official Street Map Proposed R/W Existing R/W West - SR 104 210' 210' North - Pine Street ^v.,`!'.,'. ta„>'t....1.W:nw�x...J.riiL....+.dnuuLv.d,tviwyi".rw...±:1..a.........w.:.i..«u...u,..,u.:io.,.n...{.}u..u..,....r„w:.vaui�Y�..S.:.-.. 1.�..,.. ,,. ...................... �..... ... ... ..._i.. .........�.,..._.uy.. .,._F .. Staff Report Page 2 V-9-87 C. Conformance to Chapter 20.85.010 1. Special Circumstances No special circumstances appear to exist in this particular case. The applicant is seeking to build a Victorian style home. The variance is based a specific design of a home that cannot meet the required height limit. 2. Special Privilege The proposed variance does appear to represent a grant of special privilege. The home built to the east was erected in the early 19OO's. Building height regulations have changed numerous times since then which other homes in the immediate area have had to comply with. 3. Comprehensive Plan The Comprehensive Policy Plan map designates the subject property as Low Density Residential, as are the adjacent properties to the south and east. Edmonds City Park, which is located to the north, is designated as a Community Park. The proposed variance does appear to conflict with the purposes of the Comprehensive Plan. 4. Zoninq Ordinance The subject property, as well as the surrounding properties to the south, west, and east is zoned RS-6. To the north, Edmonds City Park, is designated as Public Use. The proposed variance does appear to conflict with the purposes of the zoning ordinance and the RS-6 zone district. Building height, as part of the bulk and dimensional requirements of the zoning ordinance, is meant to regulate the size and appearance of structures. The applicant could design a home to meet the height limitation. 5. Not Detrimental The proposed variance does not appear to pose any significant impact to the public or to any near by private property or improvement. 0 L .;.. .�. s.W� £� ♦ ei.,:�^... .vY �*..a.I�d.5w�4i':.�+..abroY.�i...r... .. .. Staff Report V-9-87 Page 3 6. Minimum Variance The requested variance does not appear to represent a minimum variance request. The proposed residence could be designed to meet the building height requirement. V. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of V-9-87. The applicant desires to erect a style of home that does not meet the height limit requirements of the RS-6 zone district. Clearly, all of the review criteria of Section 20.85.010 of the ECDC are not met and the variance should be denied. n EXHIBIT 2 CITY OF EDMONDS 250 5th AVE. N. * EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 98020 * (206) 771.3202 HEARING EXAMINER MAY 08 Nell( DEPT. LARRY S. NALIGHTEN MAYOR L- -11 N D 11'. N GS A N D D F, C 1* S 10 N OF THE HEARING EXAMINER OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS IN THE MATTER O. OF FILE: V-9-87 SYDNEY LOCKE OU A VARIANCE ce. DECISION: V'1(--� e INTRODUCTION Sydney Locke, 1402' N.E, 1515th Street, Seattle, Washington, 981.55t (hereinafter rel-77ol--ed to as Applicant) has requested approval of a variance re,,--.-,trictions for property located at 11.0 'equested variance is for The Pine Street.,, site to exceed the 245-foot height allowance D1, requirement 1-0 A hearing ,)n i-Ji-GF? was held, lbefc ne�r of the City of `7. e H e a r J.n q E >1 �,I! 11 o n At the hear J. yl n-thO- p a r-I t _I t e t ioc- n and c� V i e - Bio W1,9; Il Q Sy6TIey Locke 1-402 "'41.E. 1515th St, C:Lr--,/ of WA 98151i 2'rid" Edmonds, Wit. 98020 At the hearing the following exhibits were submitted and admitted as part of the official record of c.riiu proceeding: E x h 21.1b i t I Staff r a t i o n s s.. v i. c t y Sketch PA e c ner of ot V . .. .. ..�. .. ..... ..,1 11^�. ... .. e...e i. .a. ,.,.,.�.f .... ,rv....i.. .�.�....4 ...�L..r .. Da.•..v. .....�.u.L.f.uv....-.-I r ,_.� .�. _. ........ .. _...� �.. ...__. HEARING EXAMINER RE: V-9-87 Exhibit 9 - Picture of fence on west property line it 10 - Picture of Flatt house if 11 - Picture of Applicant's Mother's house it 12 - Picture of Hendrick House it 13 - Picture of Nicholson House 14 - Picture of Park View from Lot " 15 - Ward House (demonstrative purposes only) " 16 - Memorandum from Bowman to Hearing Examiner After due consideration of the evidence presented by the Applicant; evidence elicited during the public hearing; and, as a result of the personal inspection of the subject property and surrounding areas by the Hearing Examiner, the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions constitute the basis of the decision of the Hearing Examiner. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Applicant has requested approval of a variance from the height requirement for property located at 110 Pine Street, Edmonds, Washington. The Applicant has requested that the 25-foot height restriction for the site be changed to allow for a 35-foot high residence to be developed on site. (Staff report.) 2. The Applicant has not developed the subject property. It is his intent to develop the property with a single-family residence. The proposed residence would exceed the 25-foot height requirement by 10 feet. (Locke testimony.) 3. The subject property is zoned RS-6. Edmonds Community Develop- ment Code (ECDC) 16.20.030 establishes 25 feet as the maximum height for RS-6 zoned property. It is from this standard that the Applicant seeks a variance. (Staff report and ECDC.) 4. The subject property is located on the southeast corner of the intersection of Pine Street and State Route 104. The subject property is a lot which was created by a short subdivision (#S-33-86). The Applicant intends to develop Lot 2 of the short subdivision. It is for this lot that the variance is sought. (Staff report.) 5. The properties to the south and east of the subject property are zoned RS-6. Located to the west of the subject property is State Route 104. The property to the north is the Edmonds City Park and is designated as Public Use. (Staff report.) 6.' In order for a variance to be granted within the City of Edmonds the criteria as set forth in ECDC 20.85.010 must be satisfied. These criteria include: A. Because of special circumstances relating to the property, the strict enforcement of the zoning ordinance would -2- C r HEARING EXAMINER RE: V-9-87 deprive the owner of use rights and privileges permitted to other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning. B. The approval of the variance would not be a grant of special privilege to the property in comparison with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning. C. The approval of the variance will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Edmonds. D. The approval of the variance will be consistent with the purposes of the zoning ordinance and the zone district in which the property is located. E. The variance as approved or conditionally approved will not be significantly detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and same zone. F. The requested variance is the minimum necessary to allow the owner the rights enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning. (ECDC.) 7. It is the intent of the Applicant to design a Victorian -style house -for the subject property. It is the Applicant's contention that the irregular shape of the property and its limited access prohibit him from being able to design the Victorian house as shown in the photograph of Exhibit 15, a copy of which is attached hereto. (Locke testimony.) 8. The subject property is an irregular -shaped lot. The northern property line commences at the northeast corner of the subject property and extends approximately 15 feet to the west. At that point the property line goes in a southwestern direction for approximately 71 feet. Access to the property is off Pine Street at the north portion of the subject property and the access is limited to the 15-foot northeastern property line. The subject property has a slope in a westerly direction. According to the Applicant, the slope creates problems for design of structures on site because it will prohibit an aesthetically pleasing house if the 25-foot height restriction is imposed. (Locke testimony.) 9. According to the Applicant, the slope of the site, the irregular features, including the configuration of the lot, and the limited access allows for only a small portion of the lot to be developed. Although the Applicant can develop the lot, he seeks a variance for the purpose of constructing a designed house compatible.with-existing development in the area. (Locke testimony.) -3- 1 HEARING EXAMINER RE: V-9-87 10. The Applicant testified that it is his intent to develop the lot with a residence and a garage. If the variance is not granted the access limits the development of the site and prevents the development of a garage. (Locke testimony.) 11. The Applicant contended that the Victorian house style is com- patible with the "mill town" theme of Edmonds and with the neighborhood. According to the Applicant, houses on the adjoining properties are similar architecturally to the house that he proposes. According to the Applicant, the proposed Victorian house would fit in with the neighborhood architecturally. (Locke testimony.) 12. The Comprehensive Plan of the City of Edmonds designates the subject property as Low Density Residential. According to the Applicant, the area to the north, which is the City Parks Shops, should be considered together with the area northwest of the site which is the Union Oil property. These uses imply, a conflict of the zoning in the area that is illogical and "inane". (Exhibit 6 and Locke testimony.) 13. The Planning Department of the City of Edmonds submitted that the requested variance was in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Edmonds and the zoning ordinances and the purposes of the RS-6 zone. According to the City, the Applicant could design a house that would meet the height restrictions of the City. (Bowman testimony.) 14. The City submitted that the requested variance is not supported by special circumstances and the granting of a variance would .be the grant of a special privilege. (Bowman testimony.) 15. The Planning Department of the City of Edmonds recommended denial of the variance. The Planning Department submitted in their recommendation: Staff recommends denial of V-9-87. The applicant desires to erect a style of home that does not meet the height limit requirements of the RS-6 zone district. Clearly, all of the review criteria of Section 20.85.010 of the ECDC are not met and the variance should be denied. (Staff report.) 16. A property owner in the vicinity (Langvold) submitted a letter in opposition to the variance. According to the property owner, the granting of the variance would be disruptive to her limited view and would be contrary to the uses that exist in the area. (Exhibit 7.) 17. An adjoining property owner (Flatt) testified that her view maybe impacted by any development of the Applicant's property with the use of a height variance. Upon direction of the -4- HEARING EXAMINER RE: v-9-87 i, Hearing Examiner, the Planning Department of the City of Edmonds, the Applicant and the Witness Flatt examined the view impact of the Flatt property. On April 6, 1987, the Assistant City Planner submitted a statement indicating that the view corridor from the Flatt property,: will be impacted if the variance is granted. (Exhibit 16.) CONCLUSIONS 1. The application is for the approval of a variance from the height restrictions on RS-6 zoned property located at 110 Pine Street, Edmonds, Washington. The Applicant seeks a 10-foot variance for the purpose of exceeding the 25-foot height requirement. It is the intent of the Applicant to design a Victorian -style house that would exceed the 25-foot height limit. 2. In order for a variance to be granted within te hCity of Edmonds the criteria as set forth in ECDC 20.85.010 must be satisfied. This application does not satisfy these criteria. 3. Special circumstances do not exist for the granting of a variance. Although the subject property is an irregular shaped lot that has a limited access, there is adequate area for the lot to be developed. It appears that the requested variance is for the purpose of constructing a particular style house on the property rather than for the development of the property. 4. The granting of the variance will be the grant of a special privilege. 5. The requested variance does not conflict with the purposes of the RS-6 zoned property as set forth"in ECDC 16.20.000. However, it does not meet the general development standards necessary for the RS-6 zoned property. 6. The requested variance does not conflict with the Comprehensive Plan designation of Low Density Residential. However, the variance would be new residential development that would not necessarily be compatible with the natural constraints as set forth in ECDC 15.20.005(B)(6). 7. The granting of a variance will result in impacts of views of neighboring properties. The variance will have a detrimental impact upon other properties in the area. 8. The requested variance is not the minimum necessary for the Applicant to develop the property. DECISION Based upon the preceding Findings of Fact and Conclusions; the testimony and evidence submitted at the public hearing; and, upon -5- f. 'HEARING EXAMINER RE_ V-9-87 the impressions of the Hearing Examiner at a site view, it is hereby ordered that the requested."variance for an increase in the height requirement on property located at 110 Pine Street, Edmonds, Washington, is denied. The basis of the denial is as follows: The controlling facts and conclusions of this request have been set forth in the Findings above. The variance has been denied because it appears that it is a variance in order to design a particular style of house. The Applicant's lot is an irregular -shaped lot, but it can be developed in spite of the slope of the lot. It is the intent of the Applicant to develop the lot with a Victorian - style house; however, the lot itself may not be ideal for the Victorian -style house as designed by the Applicant. This in and of itself is not a sufficient reason for the granting of a variance. The' .lot is of. ample size for further development. It does have a limited access, but the access is sufficient to allow a single- family residence and a garage. Any height variance granted to the Applicant would impact views in the vicinity. It is for these reasons, and the reasons as set forth in the Findings and Conclusions, that the variance is denied. Entered this 4th day of May, 1987, pursuant .to the authority granted the Hearing Examiner under Chapter 20.100 of the Community Development Code of the City of Edmonds. ES M. DRISCOLL ring Examiner NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL Written appeals alleging specific error of fact or other grounds for appeal may be filed with the Planning Department, City of Edmonds, Civic Center, Edmonds, Washington, 98020, within fourteen days of the date of the Hearing Examiner's final action. In this matter any appeal. must be received by the Department prior to 5:00 p.m. on May 18, 1987. am a RE mow+L 1 w ED �1iR.5�a.,�bvf�rxu.'Mf?7j4Y•,.�a�.4..i.^.miL.i.,iv.:ti <.. a�sw.... nc.�L. .i ^ec':..: +^..,.,..+.....i. -n J.:: EXHIBIT 1 F•lal-lning Eiepar•tment Ci t:ti of Edmonda Sth Avenue fd. Edmonds. WaShingt.oin 98C' R ApIDea i or D e n i a i Sydney F. Locke, AFFLICA11T 110 Fine St. Edmonds, Washington L:�807,0 Gentlemen: 1;+8 7 MAY 16 Wdr PLANNING DEPTe 1 wish to apl-1eaI the decision or denial or the above variance on the iol lowing grounds and in accorria.nce with EC.DC 2'0. 10S . 0�0 . 1. The letter, or April 6, jqLf, and Exhibit .0 (marked #17 in planning iiles) was submitted as Fier instructions or Hearing Examiner, but never considered. tSee page Findings and Decision, File V-9-or 1. 1"le.-MO from Bowman submitted at safile Lillie was considered. lEx1"ilblt 16). evidence Or va.r iar,ce hav inJ NO EFFECT on v i ew or F i att or• Langvold rroE!erties was llot considered, andior o v e P I o o k e d and/ o'r wr•ongr w i l y 5UID11ressed. r l..oriclusions of Hearing Examiner' aY'e 1"toT_ t of"lslSt.ellt witl"i the facts presented. i e : (deClsi(Dn) varI;?O—Ice requested to design a ).,articular st.yie or house. itestimonyl Letter dated Ha.r.ch gib, cExhibit 6) Q.uot.e: The variance being requested is not. to build a parr_icular• house but to be able to obtain a normal square root for lot size ratio .. t ExhiIDiT 2 2r 7/,87 AppI ieation ror• Variance. pp. y.. [,lormaI sized home to fit lot. requires height variance to be equal to nei�,ffibor'in+a_ usa ,e. 2. 13. SjtZ-irr iiepor.t contains various errors. ]e Page Quote. The variance is based on a specific design of a home that cannot meet the required height limit. Appl ication: House equal to neighboring, usage. Exhibit o: PROPOSED HOUSE that roorprints.. is not to bui id a particu lal' hu1JSP_. ��:..i rci:.,..nn.La.k::.....Kauclr......:w4h...r,..:...._wlf,........1...!.,.,..,�.ri�...�...a..:ri.r,.+_n.....c Hln..r......L,.n...N..a�k�....,.a.::i.�.ux...r'.:,.,t......:..:�.�..... ...u......e .::.... .._.,. .... .�«.............� ......... ,.. .._. �.__� — M 4. Staff Report: Not Detrimental. DECISION: Variance would be new residential development that would not. necessarily be compatible with the nar_ur•al constraints as set forth in Et -.'DC 15. C_j.C)0Si.B) (6) Constraints as set torth in ECDC 1S.00Si.B)(67. Require that new residential development. be compatible with the naTUra1 constraints of slopes, soils. geoiogy, vegetation and drainage. FACTS: THE LOT' IS THE FORHER VEGETABLE GARDEi,I OF 1L6 P I NE, VO 1 D OF NATURAL VEGETATION. UNDERLAIN WITH GLACIERAL TILL. HAS X ECELLENT DF.AI1dAGE AND HILDLY SLOPES WESTWARDLY. Hearing Examiner' could 110T have visited the site in accordance with ECDC. S. EXHIBIT J Site plan showing proposed house on easterly side of the lot and center drive location. The rights enjoyed by the other properties in the vicinity with Lhe same mooning enable ti-,em to NOT have a. garage in the CENTER of their house in order to bacl; out onto the street. DECISION The lot is of ample 5i7 far• further development. It does have a. limited access, but the access is sufficient to allow a single-family residence and a garage. Page 1-3 pp. S. FINDINi� OF FACTS. ...access is limited to the 1S foot norLheasLern property line. FACT: EXHIBIT 3.6 & O. ACCESS IS IN CENTER OF LOT. N0RTHEnJTEr- R14 PR0PERT'i L I NE I S BL0CI:ED B''i PUD POLE AND GUY WIRE. NORTHWESITERN CORNER. IS BLOCKED BY FREEWAII. FENCE AND ELECTR I CAL CABINET. Hear i ng Examiner made numerous errors in the statement of the ra.ct� For the above stated reasons I hereby exercise my right of appeal in accordance with EC -DC _u. 1u5. 04v. i=',lticere i >'&bey F . 126 Fine Edmonds, Ldci ;t�r_ef Washington MAY 2O�y�r C I TY O F E 13 M O N® S PLANNING DEPT. LARRY S. NAUGHTEN MAYOR 250 5th AVE. N. • EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 98020 • (206) 771.3202 HEARING EXAMINER IN THE MATTER OF `ii E APPLICATION FILE: V-9-87 OF SYDNEY LOCKE APPROVAL OF A VARIANCE CLARIFICATION On May 4, 1987, a decision was issued for the above -captioned matter. In tho decision the exhibits were listed including Exhibit 16, a memorandum from Duane Bowman. Exhibit 16 was submitted after the hearing and it included attachments sub- mitted by the Applicant. The attachments were a letter from the Applicants and drawings. All of these were incorporated as Exhibit 16.. DATED this �� day of May, 1987. a - 1 - 0 �T)64ES M. DRISCOLL earina Examiner City of Edmonds Item number: Oriqinator: Planning Division For Action: X For Information: C/ SUBJECT: SET DATE FOR HEARING ON APPEAL OF HEARING EXAMINER DECISION DENYING HEIGHT VARIANCE AT 110 PINE STREET (AP-8-87/SYDNEY LOCKE) AGENDA TIME: Consent AGENDA DATE: June 2, 1987 EXHIBITS ATTACHED: 1. Appeal Letter Clearances: Dept./Indiv./Initials ------------------ ------------------ ADMIN SVCS/FINANCE CITY ATTORNEY CITY CLERK COMMUNITY SERVICES ENGINEERING PARKS & RECREATION PLANNING'^( PUBLIC WORKS FIRE PERSONNEL POLICE COMMITTEE MAYOR COMMENTS: EXPENDITURE AMOUNT APPROPRIATION REQUIRED: $0 BUDGETED: $0 REQUIRED: $0 HISTORY AND SUMMARY STATEMENT: On April 2, 1987, the Hearing Examiner held a public hearing on the variance request of Sydney Locke to allow a proposed new residence at 110 Pine Street to exceed the permitted 25' height limit by 10'. The Hearing Examiner issued his decision on May 4, 1987 denying the variance request. Subsequently, on May 18, 1987, Mr. Locke filed an appeal seeking to overturn the Hearing Examiner's decision. Attached is a copy of the appeal letter. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Set July 7, 1987 as the date to hear the appeal of Sydney Locke. COUNCIL ACTION: LOCKEAP/COUNCIL 0 THESE MINUTES SUBJECT TO UNE 9, 1987 APPROVAL EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 2, 1987 The regular meeting of the Edmonds City Council was called to order at 7 p.m. by Mayor Larry Naughten in the Plaza Meeting Room of the Edmonds Library. All present joined in the flag sa- lute. PRESENT ABSENT STAFF PRESENT Larry Naughten, Mayor Tracy Scott, Mary Lou Block, Planning Div. Mgr. Jack Wilson, Council Pres. Student Rep. Art Housler, Admin. Svc. Director Steve Dwyer Duane Bowman, Asst. City Planner Laura Hall Jack Weinz, Fire Chief Jo -Anne Jaech Jim Barnes, Parks & Rec. Div. Mgr. Bill Kasper Peter Hahn, Comm. Svc. Director John Nordquist Bob Alberts, City Engineer Lloyd Ostrom Bobby Mills, Public Works Supt. Jerry Hauth, Hydraulics Engineer Scott Snyder, City Attorney Jackie Parrett, City Clerk Margaret Richards, Recorder Mayor Naughten recognized County Councilman Bill Brubaker in the,audience. CONSENT AGENDA Items (B) and (F) were removed from the Consent Agenda. COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER KASPER, TO APPROVE THE BALANCE OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED. The approved items on the Consent Agenda include the following: (A) ROLL CALL (C) SET JULY 7, 1987 FOR HEARING ON APPEAL OF HEARING EXAMINER DECISION DENYING HEIGHT VARIANCE AT 110 PINE ST. (AP-8-87/SYDNEY LOCKE) (D) RELATINGDOPTED ORDINANCE UNIFORM6SWIMMINGAMENDING POOLEDMONDS CODEE TOCOMMUNITY PEERIODDEVELOPMENT WHICHHCODE SECTION WORK MUST BE COMMENCED FROM 60 TO 180 DAYS (CDC-2-87/CITY OF EDMONDS) ' (E) FINAL PLAT APPROVAL FOR 10 LOT SUBDIVISION AT 8TH AVE. N. AND ALOHA (P-5-86/ALOHA) (G) APPROVAL OF CONCESSION AGREEMENT FOR ANNUAL JULY 4 BOY SCOUT CHICKEN-Q APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF MAY 26, 1987 [ITEM (B) ON THE CONSENT AGENDA Councilmember Hall noted the following additions: page 2, paragraph 5, "Annette Jones said it stinks!"; page 5, paragraph 6, "Councilmember Hall said she spoke with the Department of Ecology in Olympia which gave her statistics as to funding that the City would receive". Councilmember Dwyer made the following corrections: page 4, paragraph 6, "Mr. Hahn said only if appraisals indicated that the present site is more valuable than the site to be purchased"; page 4, paragraph 8, "Councilmember Dwyer inquired if anyone had any reason to believe that it would be more favorable than 18%. No one replied affirmatively"; page 5, paragraph 8, "Councilmember Dwyer said it has become apparent that there is no" --omit the word "single" --"reason to believe that moving the site will result in a scenario more beneficial than an 18% to 25% increase over ttre already projected increased rate". COUNCILMEMBER HALL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST, TO APPROVE THE MINUTES AS AMEND- ED. MOTION CARRIED. k PLANNING DEPT. CITY OF EDMONDS LARRY S. NAUGHTEN MAYOR CIVIC CENTER • EDMONDS. WASHINGTON 98020 • (206) 775.2525 June 5, 1987 Mr. Sydney F. Locke 12345 Lake City Way NE Suite 279 Seattle, WA 98125 Dear Syd: The new Mobile Home/Trailer Ordinance applies only to Highway 99 and planned residential development. As we discussed, once you get your Building Permit you can then secure a trailer permit for storage. I would strongly suggest you be pre- pared to apply for your Building Permit on July 8, 1987, if your ap- peal should be denied by the City Council. In the meantime, we will extend your ability to store your trailer on your lot until July 20, 1987. Sincerely, CITY OF EDMONDS r au en Mayo LSN/db cc: Mary Lou Block, Planning Manager INCORPORATED AUGUST 1 1, 1 890 0 RECEIVED / i JUL 619.87 � Edrr►axls City Clerk _�.�7� `I %� 7r 7p Originator: Planning Division For Action: X For Information: SUBJECT: HEARING ON APPEAL OF HEARING EXAMINER DECISION DENYING A HEIGHT VARIANCE AT 110 PINE STREET (AP-8-87/SIDNEY LOCKE) AGENDA TIME: 30 Minutes AGENDA DATE: July 7, 1987 EXHIBITS ATTACHED: 1. Appeal Letter 2. Hearing Examiner Report 3. Vicinity Map/Site Plan 4. Building Elevation Clearances: Dept./Indiv./Initials ADMIN SVCS/FINANCE CITY ATTORNEY CITY CLERK _ COMMUNITY SERVICES _ ENGINEERING PARKS & RECRE TION PLANNING PUBLIC WORKS FIRE PERSONNEL POLICE COMMITTEE MAYOR COMMENTS: EXPENDITURE AMOUNT APPROPRIATION REQUIRED: $0 BUDGETED: $0 REQUIRED: $0 HISTORY AND SUMMARY STATEMENT: On April 2, 1987, the Hearing Examiner held a public hearing on the variance request of Sydney Locke to allow a proposed new residence at 110 Pine Street to to exceed the permitted 25' height limit by 10'. The Hearing Examiner issued his decision on May 4, 1987 denying the variance request. Subsequently, on May 18, 1987, Mr. Locke filed an appeal seeking to overturn the Hearing Examiner's decision. Attached is a copy of the appeal letter. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Uphold the Hearing Examiner's decision and deny the appeal. LOCKEMEM/COUNCIL a .._.._....`.._,.�.._c....�..,,.ic�1vs..tx.,.u.'ant.,rr.+..+.t•b.'.�a,I.H.u`.w`,c..w......-...,..c.,S�*.av ..n..._,�.�n T _.�..., .. .. .._., i _�____ �` ..__,...�...o�...we.... �� PLEASE PRINT YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS BELOW IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM AND/OR WISH TO RECEIVE A COPY OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S FINDINGS OF FACT V-9-87 SYDNEY LOCKE Variance to exceed the permitted height limit of 25' by 10' for proposed residence at 110 Pine Street. NAME ADDRESS ,v,tl a" 1� /c�oZo .?Vim �r- �d " . �q f q j �q C9Gti� � e � N� S rc.V A ClgJss 110 PI`\ rnn9 R-0C')-o ��u�s 5 F6'2' PRESENTATION BY WOODWAY MAYOR JEANNETTE WOOD ON PERFORMING ARTS PROPOSAL Mayor Jeannette Wood said she was present as Chairperson of the South Snohomish County Cultural Arts District. She submitted a proposal to the Council. She said the District passed a proposed project which will provide approximately 43,000 square feet for a small theatre with full stage capabilities, an orchestra pit, dressing rooms, a rehearsal area as well as all other required ancillary space, and provide approximately 800 seats. She noted that the project will not exceed $7,000,000. Mayor Wood said 1,000 square feet will be designated for visual arts. There will be office space, custodial space, parking, and fully landscaped grounds and terraces. The project will be located on 10 acres adjacent to Edmonds Community College. She said the parcel will be leased for 99 years at $1 per year. She noted that the college will provide the operation and maintenance. Mayor Wood said the heads of the entities of the District were contacted in May, and the proposal before the Council represented discussions that took place with those entities. Councilmember Hall said Mayor Wood has devoted countless hours towards the project. She ex- pressed her appreciation to Mayor Wood. She reiterated that the proposal was a true reflection of discussions with the entities of the District. She requested the Council to bear in mind that the City was part of an interlocal agreement which encompasses South County. Councilmember Ostrom inquired about the indebtedness of the District. Mayor Wood said the Dis- trict is indebted to Snohomish County for $7,700 and to the architect for approximately $40,000. Councilmember Ostrom inquired when the election is proposed. Mayor Wood said November was ini- tially proposed. However, discussion regarding rescheduling of the election will take place on July 8 because it conflicts with other events. Councilmember Ostrom inquired about the feasibili- ty of the Puget Sound Christian College (PSCC) for the Cultural and Performing Arts Center. Mayor Wood said remodeling of the PSCC would cost approximately $3.6 million and acquisition would run between $1.5 and $2 million. She noted that the heating system is in need or upgrad- ing, there is no air conditioning, and parking is not adequate, which would require that addition- al land be purchased. Councilmember Ostrom said figures that he obtained reflected a $2.5 mil- lion construction cost and $2 million for land acquisition. Mayor Wood said she obtained the figures she had from Mr. Knudsen, who conducted a feasibility study for the project. She noted that Edmonds Community College terminated its lease with PSCC and would not provide operation and maintenance for the facility at that location. In addition, members of the Board felt that that site was not centrally located in the South County District. Councilmember Ostrom said he was not convinced that the Board had seriously considered the issue. Mayor Wood disagreed. She said the Board has worked very hard on the project. She said the original proposal was rejected be- cause it was felt that the community was not prepared for such a large theatre; thus, the project before the Council at the present time was proposed with the thought that expansion would be possible in the future if and when the need arose. Councilmember Ostrom clarified that he did not think that the PSCC has been taken seriously and not that the Board was not serious about its endeavors. Councilmember Wilson noted that two of the entities involved have stated that they will withdraw their support if the Center is proposed in downtown Edmonds. Mayor Wood said the Mountlake Terrace Council passed a resolution in support of the proposal and stated that they would not support the project if it was located on the PSCC site. She said the Lynnwood Council, although not prepared to endorse the proposal, spoke favorably of the proposal. f s Councilmember Kasper inquired about the percentage in favor at the last election. Mayor Wood I' replied 42% so it was validated. Councilmember Kasper suggested that a ballot be taken at the general election so that a true representation of the desires of the community is ascertained. Councilmember Kasper inquired about the tax levy on the proposal previously put to the voters. E Mayor Wood replied 48.5t per thousand. HEARING ON ,APPEAL OF HEARING EXAMINER DECISION DENYING HEIGHT VARIANCE AT 110 PINE ST. t/e�r��•�'y_..,� AP-8-87/SIDNEY LOCKE Planning Division Manager Mary Lou Block reported that on April 2, 1987, the Hearing Examiner held a public hearing on the variance request of Sidney Locke to allow a proposed residence at 110 Pine Street to exceed the permitted 25 foot height limit by 10 feet. The Hearing Examiner issued his decision on May 4, 1987 denying the variance request. On May 18, 1987, Mr. Locke i filed an appeal seeking to overturn the Hearing Examiner's decision. k' Ms. Block noted that a copy of the appeal letter was attached to the Council packets. I Ms. Block said it is Staff's recommendation to uphold the Hearing Examiner's decision and deny the appeal. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 3 JULY 7, 1987 Ms. Block reviewed Exhibit 3, which depicted the subject property and the property line adjacent to it. She said the lot in question is approximately 7,000 square feet and is located in an RS-6 zone. Ms. Block reviewed the Hearing Examiner's Conclusions and Decision as follows: "1) the applica- tion is for the approval of a variance from the height restrictions on RS-6 zoned property located at 110 Pine Street, Edmonds, Washington. The applicant seeks a 10 foot variance for the purpose of exceeding the 25 foot height limit; 2) in order for a variance to be granted within the City of Edmonds, the criteria as set forth in ECDC 20.85.010 must be satisfied. This applica- tion does not satisfy these criteria; 3) special circumstances do not exist for the granting of a variance. Although the subject property is an irregular -shaped lot that has a limited access, there is adequate area for the lot to be developed. It appears that the requested variance is for the purpose of constructing a particular style house on the property rather than for the development of the property; 4) the granting of the variance will be the grant of a special privi- lege; 5) the requested variance does not conflict with the purposes of the RS-6 zoned property as set forth in ECDC 16.20.000. However, it does not meet the general development standards necessary for the RS-6 zoned property; 6) the requested variance does not conflict with the Comprehensive Plan designation of low density residential. However, the variance would be new residential development that would not necessarily be compatible with the natural constraints as set forth in ECDC 15.20.005(B) (6); 7) the granting of a variance will result in impacts of views of neighboring properties. The variance will have a detrimental impact upon other properties in the area; 8) the requested variance is not the minimum necessary for the applicant to develop the property. "Based upon the preceding Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, the testimony and evidence submitted at the public hearing, and upon the impressions of the Hearing Examiner at a site view, it is hereby ordered that the requested variance for an increase in the height requirement on property located at 110 Pine Street, Edmonds, Washington, is denied. The basis of the denial is as follows: the controlling facts and conclusions of this request have been set forth in the Findings above. The variance has been denied because it appears that it is a variance in order to design a particular style of house. The applicant's lot is an irregular -shaped lot, but it can be developed in spite of the slope of the lot. It is the intent of the applicant to develop the lot with a Victorian -style house. However, the lot itself may not be ideal for the Victorian -style house as designed by the applicant. This, in and of itself, is not sufficient reason for the granting of a variance. The lot is of ample size for further development. It does have a limited access, but the access is sufficient to allow a single-family residence and a garage. "Any height variance granted to the applicant would impact views in the vicinity. "It is for these reasons, and the reasons set forth in the Findings and Conclusions, that the variance is denied". Councilmember Ostrom referred to Exhibit 4, noting that it depicted an existing house. Community Services Director Peter Hahn clarified that that structure is located east of the property in question. Ms. Block said there are two trailers that are located on the subject property at the present time. Sidney Locke, applicant, said he desired to build a home on the subject property which would be compatible with the lot, as well as the community, because he wanted to live next to his mother. He said the family has owned the property for fifty years. Mr. Locke said the home which he proposes is not compatible with the Code because of several restrictive features of the lot. He said he was only requesting that he be granted the same rights and privileges as his neighbors have been granted. Mr. Locke requested that a moratorium be placed on the issue until such time that the City determines the location of the secondary wastewater treatment plant because he said he does not want to make any investment in a home that may be located adjacent to the treatment plant. Mayor Naughten recommended that Mr. Locke proceed with the application for a variance before making a decision to build or not. Councilmember Kasper inquired about the length of time that a variance is effective. Ms. Block replied one year until acted upon. She said once action has taken place, the variance does not expire. Mr. Locke said he was frustrated because Staff never mentioned to him that the Pine Street site was being investigated as a potential location for the treatment plant. Mr. Hahn clarified that EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 4 JULY 7, 1987 the Pine Street site had not become a viable option until May of 1987. He noted that an exten- sion was granted to Mr. Locke to keep the illegally placed trailer on the subject property. Mr. Locke said he had obtained a permit for the trailer in March, which was mysteriously re- scinded shortly thereafter but through the aid of Mayor Naughten reinstated. Councilmember Wilson stated that the Council was prepared to hear the variance issue and inquired of Mr. Locke if he wished to proceed. Mr. Locke said he would like a moratorium to be placed on the issue until such time that the treatment plant site is identified. Councilmember Wilson suggested that an alternative to the situation would be for Mr. Locke to request that the issue be scheduled for discussion on September 1st after the proposals were received for the treatment plant. Mr. Locke said that date was acceptable to him. At the recommendation of the City Attorney, Mayor Naughten opened the public portion of the hear- ing. No public input was offered. Mayor Naughten closed the public portion of the hearing. COUNCILMEMBER DWYER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER JAECH, TO CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING TO SEPTEMBER 1, 1987. MOTION CARRIED. (The complete file of the Hearing Examiner is on file in the Planning Department.) Councilmember Wilson stated that several people were in the audience to hear Item #8, Continued Council Consideration of Hekinan, Japan as a Sister City, and requested that that item be heard before the preceding in-house items. COUNCILMEMBER WILSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER HALL, TO DISCUSS ITEM N8 BEFORE ITEMS #6 and 7. MOTION CARRIED. CONTINUED COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF HEKINAN, JAPAN AS SISTER CITY (FROM MAY 5) Mayor Naughten stated that when the Council discussed the Sister City program at the May 5 meet- ing, the Council expressed approval of the concept but had several questions. Discussion on funding and the role of the Sister city Committee and its relation with the City and the City's role were reviewed, as well as other issues. Mayor Naughten said he invited the following community members who have expressed interest in a Sister City program: Tom Nielsen, President of Edmonds Community College; Roy Ghazimorad, Edmonds Community College; Sam McKinstry, Sister City Committee; and Pat Hale, Bellevue Sister City Committee. Mayor Naughten noted that there were attached letters of support in the Council packet from the following entities: Edmonds Sister City Committee, Edmonds Tourism Committee, Edmonds Chamber of Commerce, Edmonds Main Streets Program, Edmonds School District, Mayor William Moore, City of Everett, and Edmonds Community College. Mayor Naughten stated that the major responsibility and success of the sister city relationship lies with the Sister City Committee and in their programs for "homestay", exchanges, and fund raising. The City's role is in the official relationship and as a support for the Sister City Committee. Mayor Naughten said he will appoint a Staff member to handle official correspondence and Sister City Committee interface. Mayor Naughten said it is important to understand that the program is a slow -growth relation- ship and builds and develops over the years. He suggested that the following budget be projected in the Mayor's budget: 1987 - $500; 1988- $500-$1,000; 1989 - $500-$1,000; 1990 - $500; 1991 - $500. Mayor Naughten said any official trip to Hekinan would be budgeted in the year it is planned. Mayor Naughten stated that Hekinan is ready to accept Edmonds as its sister city. He said there are eight Hekinan junior high and high school students planning to come to Edmonds for a homestay visit in July. The Edmonds Sister City Committee has arranged all of the details of the visit. An elementary school "pen pal" exchange has been established between Hekinan and Seaview Elementary School. Councilmember Ostrom said he understood that the Council would contribute seed money the first year that the relationship was established but that the program would be self sustaining in the ensuing years. He inquired how the Sister City Committee intended to fund the program and what activities were planned. Tom Nielsen spoke in support of a sister city relationship. He said although he has not had direct experience with a sister city, the College has had extensive experience with sister colleg- es in other countries. He said those experiences have been very rewarding to the College, as well as to the students, and has grown significantly since its inception. Mr. Nielsen said the EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 5 JULY 7, 1987 F EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL' AGENDA MEMO Item number: Originator• Planning Division For Action: X For Information: SUBJECT: HEARING ON APPEAL OF HEARING EXAMINER DECISION DENYING A HEIGHT VARIANCE AT 110 PINE STREET (AP-8-87/SIDNEY LOCKE) AGENDA TIME: 30 Minutes AGENDA DATE: September 1, 1987 EXHIBITS ATTACHED: 1. Appeal Letter 2. Hearing Examiner Report 3. Vicinity Map/Site Plan 4. Building Elevation 5. City Council Minutes of 7/7/87 Clearances: Dept./Indiv./Initials ADMIN SVCS/FINANCE CITY ATTORNEY CITY CLERK COMMUNITY SERVICES ENGINEERING PARKS & RECREATION PLANNINGVY PUBLIC WORK S FIRE _ PERSONNEL POLICE - COMMITTEE MAYOR COMMENTS: EXPENDITURE AMOUNT APPROPRIATION REQUIRED: $0 BUDGETED: $0 REQUIRED: $0 HISTORY AND SUMMARY STATEMENT: On April 2, 1987, the Hearing Examiner held a public hearing on the variance request of Sydney Locke to allow a proposed new residence at 110 Pine Street to` exceed the permitted 25' height limit by 10'. The Hearing Examiner issued his decision on May 4, 1987 denying the variance request. Subsequently, on May 18, 1987, Mr. Locke filed an appeal seeking to overturn the Hearing Examiner's decision. The City Council continued the hearing on this matter from July 7, 1987 until the issue of the location of the secondary sewage treatment plant was decided. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Uphold the Hearing Examiner's decision. LOCKEMEM/COUNCIL 0 Councilmember Kasper inquired if the budget request for the City of Edmonds was proportionate to the budget request for the County. Dr. Hinds said the increase for the County was larger than for the cities. Councilmember Kasper inquired if the ratio of budget increases to small towns was proportionate to that of cities. Dr. Hinds said the budget requests have increased by the same percentage in accordance with populations. Councilmember Wilson inquired to what extent other counties were becoming involved in the preven- tion of AIDS. Dr. Hinds said the primary effort in the Seattle area focused on educational pro- grams to control the spread of the AIDS virus. Councilmember Wilson noted that a recent newspa- per article quoted the Surgeon General as saying that a vaccine will almost assuredly not be forthcoming in the next decade and perhaps never. Councilmember Dwyer inquired when the Health District will have a sufficient staffing level, as well as funds, to meet the demands of the public. He also inquired what percentage of funding was necessary to accomplish that goal. Dr. Hinds assured the Council, although he said it was difficult to determine the precise needs of public health in advance, that a budget increase of 18% would not be necessary for the 1989 budget. Councilmember Dwyer inquired what the District was attempting to accomplish with a budget increase. Dr. Hinds said the District was trying to fill the staffing level needs and, thus, meet the demands of public health services. Councilmem- ber Dwyer inquired how optimum staffing levels are determined. Dr. Hinds said the staffing level is determined by the external demand for public health services. Councilmember Hall said she was dismayed, as a health board member, to learn that past staff had not negotiated for departmental needs. She said she was pleased that Dr. Hinds and Mr. Mockler had joined the staff of the Health District because they were reorganizing and restructuring the District. Councilmember Hall pointed out that the important issue to remember was not whether an epidemic had broken out in an Edmonds or Lynnwood restaurant but that a problem existed within the County and must be acted upon. Councilmember Nordquist pointed out that because the smaller towns in the County had no revenue available for public health services that the larger cities, as well as the County, was subsidiz- ing those programs. Councilmember Hall inquired about the time line for the budgetary process of the Health Dis- trict. Dr. Hinds said that process was dependent upon finalization of the budgetary process of cities within Snohomish County. Councilmember Kasper inquired if the State is showing a trend of providing less support for pub- lic health services to local governments. Dr. Hinds said only minimum support is received from the State. Mayor Naughten thanked Dr. Hinds for attending the meeting and sharing information with the Coun- cil. CONTINUED HEARING ON APPEAL OF HEARING EXAMINER DECISION DENYING HEIGHT VARIANCE AT 110 PINE ST. AP-8-87/SIDNEY LOCKE FROM JULY 7, 1987 Planning Division Manager Mary Lou Block reported that on April 2, 1987, the Hearing Examiner I held a public hearing on the variance request of Sydney Locke to allow a proposed new residence at 110 Pine Street to exceed the permitted 25 foot height limit by 10 feet. The Hearing Examiner issued his decision on May 4, 1987 denying the variance request. On May 18, 1987, Mr. Locke filed an appeal seeking to overturn the Hearing Examiner's decision. The City Council continued the hearing on this matter from July 7, 1987 until the issue of the location of the secondary wastewater treatment plant was decided. Ms. Block noted that the Coun- cil rendered a decision last week to construct the treatment plant at the existing plant location on Dayton Street. Consequently, Mr. Locke's concern regarding the possibility.of construction of the treatment plant adjacent to his property on Pine Street was no longer an issue. Councilmember Ostrom inquired if discussions have taken place between Staff and Mr. Locke in the interim which have altered any position. Ms. Block replied negatively. Sidney Locke said because of the configuration of his property and existing structures adjacent to his property on Pine Street, access to his lot is restricted to the center of his property and the buildability of the lot was also restricted. Mr. Locke said he felt a variance should be granted to him to build the style of house he has proposed because he believed the proposal met all of the criteria as set forth in ECDC 20.85.010. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 4 SEPTEMBER 1, 1987 .. �1.� 1� , 7...1. � .r .. i �. ., . !� •.... ,. b, .,,r i..f ,.,, irL�.. ..,.,s....... .. ..... ._ ...„s.;...,..,... _w.,a;.>..,..,...r. H.�,..,�_.,.. ..... I. _... _ .. . ,. ............... �..... _.... ....y.. ,...,.. ,.._.,..»...._l. >t..-.,.. ?`..�.....�..,,.... .. ._ ___ hr i Mr. Locke said he would appreciate it if he was allowed to build a quality home on his lot. He said the style was conducive to the theme of Old Mill Town. Mr. Locke added that his grandfather moved to Edmonds in 1893 and he, also, is a native of Edmonds. Councilmember Ostrom inquired if Mr. Locke still desired to construct a replica of a Victorian house. Mr. Locke replied affirmatively. Councilmember Kasper inquired if compensation was awarded to his family when SR 104 was construct- ed. Mr. Locke replied affirmatively. He said the family received $3OO. Councilmember Kasper inquired about the increase in grade since the family purchased the lot. Mr. Locke said the family would have owned the property to the far side of the freeway. However, the creek was relocated to the area where the fish hatchery is presently located. Councilmember Hall inquired if the variance for 10 feet was necessary only because the tower would exceed the height limit. Mr. Locke said the tower would only exceed the mansard roof by 5 to 6 feet. Mayor Naughten opened the public portion of the hearing. No public input was offered. Mayor Naughten closed the public portion of the hearing. COUNCILMEMBER WILSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER HALL, TO UPHOLD THE HEARING EXAMINER'S DECISION. Councilmember Ostrom inquired if the motion included the adoption of the Hearing Examiner's Find- ings of Fact & Conclusions of Law. Councilmember Wilson replied affirmatively. The seconder agreed. Councilmember Hall expressed concern with the proposal because she said she was unsure what type of structure would actually be built. Councilmember Ostrom said the charge of the Council was to determine whether a height variance should be granted and that the type of structure was irrele- vant to the issue. Councilmember Kasper said he would be better directed if he was aware of what type of structure was proposed. He thought that the construction of a home with character and sentiment would be an asset to the community rather than a liability because he said the surrounding area has been severely impacted by the construction of SR 104. MOTION CARRIED. HEARING ON PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTION 18.80 REGARDING STREET STAN- DARDS CITY OF EDMONDS Planning Division Manager Mary Lou Block reported that several months ago the Fire Department indicated an interest in modifying street standards in the Community Development Code to assure 20 feet of clearance for access to all lots in the City. These new standards pertain to all new commercial or multi -family development or single-family development on lots capable of subdivi- sion and not for single-family development on a single lot on an existing street or access ease- ment. Ms. Block said the Planning and Engineering Divisions worked with the Fire Department to develop the language and illustrations necessary to accomplish the modifications. In addition, there were other modifications that Staff would like to incorporate in regard to driveway width and street and driveway slope. Ms. Block said Staff discussed the proposed changes with the Community Services Committee on several occasions as well as with a number of local developers. As a result of those meetings, there have been several modifications to the original draft, which are reflected in the revised table of street standards. Ms. Block said it is the recommendation of Staff that the Council adopt the revised standards and direct the City Attorney to prepare the necessary ordinance. Fire Marshal Gary McComas noted that the issue arose due to a need of clarification in the Uni- form Fire Code to establish minimum standards, primarily for access of emergency services as well as for access of the users of property. He said because the existing Code is not in compliance with the Uniform Fire Code, the proposed modifications have been recommended for approval. Councilmember Kasper inquired if only a 20 foot access was required to a fire hydrant if it was adjacent to a lot which was capable of being subdivided. Fire Marshall McComas said the intent of the proposed modifications was to obtain access to a building and not just to a fire hydrant. Councilmember Kasper inquired if 20 feet of easement would be required to a home at the end of a EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 5 SEPTEMBER 1, 1987 0 r� •f ti {+t?'lSt\ a , Y Oro �— CI�T�Y O F E o M O N O �� LARRY S. NAUGHTEN MAYOR f t-,L.1{Yrurf—U 250 51h AVE. N. EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 96020 (206) 771.3202 PETER E. HAHN COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTOR DATE: 9/23/87 TO: Sydney F . Locke 110 Pine St. Edmonds, WA 98020 TRANSMITTING: Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law t i, AS YOU REQUESTED: FOR YOUR INFORMATION: XXX AS WE DISCUSSED': FOR APPROVAL: ` FOR YOUR FILE: REVIEW AND COMMENT COMMENT AND RETURN: MINUTES OF MEETING: REMARKS: PLANNING DIVISION Mary Lou Block PUBLIC WORKS PLANNING P,4RK.S AND RECREATION ENGINEERING FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW BEFORE THE EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL Application No.: V-9-87 Sidney F. Locke, Applicant Sidney F. Locke, Applicant, has appealed a determination of the Edmonds Hearing Examiner denying his application for a variance from the permitted 25 foot height limitation in the single family residential zone (RS) to 35 feet for property located at 110 Pine Street. Following notice and hearing in accordance with law, the City Council hereby enters its following Findings of Fact and Conclusions, and Decision based upon the hearing before its Hearing Examiner, the Hearing Examiner's decision, and the City Council's hearing and the evidence introduced thereat. Based thereon, the City Council hereby adopts the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of its Hearing Examiner and therefore denies the application for variance of Mr. Locke. DATED this 02& day of 1987. ATTESTED/AUTHENTICATED: CL K, JACQUELINE G. PARRETT WSS50138F APPROVED: 0 I Planning Div P 290P4611n`ffj0 p� 2�U Idt.11 ` 1:1ji RECEIPT FOR CERTIFIED MAIL RECEIPT FOR CERTIFIED MAIL d i:-.--.i;i�:, r.� G'Vi.Pvt m CD v Sidney F Locke Sidney F Locke co 3636 NE 155th co Cn 10 Pine St - -- - __-. _ _-- ___-- ._____----____-- o "rSeattl'e WA'I''98155 r trC till nn1,I! r' rlr — -- Edmonds WA 98020 ; - i Certified Fet- ----- 14, Rcstncted 00l1very fee ._ sir iti �.�-r i•i(' r'',:"�") Return Rt a 1pl sh, wgl,_t v, ,yl,,,.� •r.' i)tl; "O:.•:rnzV to whomand Unto Uc h:e:e•I toin 00 00 CT1 Retum Rr c elpl .' Dale- tint' ldd, s fjt Dirrtvyy C a, 0 P'r S!m,lik .)r U,dr• � lr_ S. 6 cr) 0. d � +r Z-In d'f w+{ 4 N'- ri A4. �TaA)4� a'iy '�. i• � yi,rr�p l s.����i� SENDER: Complete items 1 and 2 when additional services are desired, and complete items 3 and 4. Put your address in the "RETURN TO" space 'onthe reverse side. Failure to do this will prevent this card from being returned to you. The return receipt fed will provide you the name of the person delivered to and the date of deliver . For additional fees the following services are available. Consult postmaster for fees and -check box es) for additional'service(s) requested. 1: 12 Show to whom delivered, date, and addressee's address. 2. ❑ Restricted Delivery. i 3. Article Addressed to: 4. Article Number P ;:290'1-461 960 as S idney F Locke 4 �ji� Type of Service: 110 Pine St �� El Registered El Insured Edmonds -WA .Express Mail ` 98020 ® Certified ❑COD U'1 Always obtain signature of addressee or .agent and DATE DELIVERED. 5. Sfgnat re — H,oare 11 6.Signature — Agent X 7: Date of 0eliv ry, PS Form 3811,Ftb, 8' Addressee's Address (ONLY if 'requested and fee paid) i t t I _I I i DOMESTIC RETURN RECEIPT` t MEMORANDUM December 2, 1987 TO: Scott Snyder, City Attorney Linda Norman, City Attorney FROM: Leigh Francis, Code Enforcement SUBJECT: Security Trailers at 110 Pine Street In a previous memo, I alerted you to a code violation regarding Syd Locke. The previous memo is attached. Mr. Locke has not, as we requested, moved his trailer. We would like you to begin prosecution as soon as possible. An Investigation Report is attached. The violation is noted on the form. I do not know Locke's birthdate; his full name is noted on the Report. The owner of the property is listed as Marian Locke; her address is noted on the Report. Correspondence between the City and Mr. Locke's attorney, Thomas McDonough, is attached to the previous memo. Please call me if you have any questions at 771-3202. k EDMONDS POLICE DEPARTMENT EC INVESTIGATION REPORT DATE - TIME REPORTED -- ----- TYPE OF OFFENSE WITH ARREST Zoning code violation_ DATE TIME OF OFFENSE AND/OR ARREST Ongoi n9 -- ------ -- -- LOCATION OF OFFENSE AND/OR ARREST 110 Pine Street, Edmonds WA 98020 VICTIf•1 NO. 1 ( LAST - FIRST - MIDDLE t FIRM NAME IF BUSINESS D.O.B. ADDRESS OF VICTIM ERSON REPORTING ( LAST - FIRST - MIDDLE I D ITNESS NO. 1 (LAST - FIRST - MIDDLE) ADDRESS ADDRESS RES. PHONE BUSPECT NO. 1 (LASI - t-Ir[JI - nii�� )roperty Owner: Marian Locke, 126 Pine Street, Edmonds, WA 98020 xw/�x Iiolator: Sydney F. Lock x�l�126 Pine Street, Edmonds, WA 98020 — RACE•SEX-AGE D-O•B HEIGHT WEIGHT BUILD COMPL. HAIR CLOTHING I T E M (1) Identify additional victims. (2) Identify and/or describe additional witnesses. (3) Identify and/or describe additional suspects. (4) Describe property taken, showing serial numbers, identifying marks and value of each. (5) Describe vehicle used by suspect and disposition. (6) Describe physical evidence, where found, by whom and disposition. (7) Describe victim's injuries and where medical exam occurred. (8) Report all property damage —describe damage and indicate amount of loss. (9)Describe premises —or vehicle of victim and where parked. ❑ O.K. TO DISCLOSE ❑ DO NOT DISCLOSE FILE NO. EVIDENCE NO. OCCUPATION RACE - SEX - AGF Bus. PHONE ES. PHONE RES. PHONE SCHOOL ATTENDS EYES OCCUPATION TATTOOS, SCARS. MARKS. PECULIARITIES (10) For burglary and larceny (car prowl) reports describe entry whe.-e and how, and fools used. (11) Reconstruct incident (offense and/or arrest). (12) Indicate time and location where victims and witnesses may be contacted later by follow-up investigators. (13) For juvenile(s) placed in detention, indicate name, address and phone of parents or guardian and how notified. (14) List persons you require to be subpoenaed to court. (15) Indicate if you need a CCDR or ADR and an whom. (16) Indicate arraignment recommendations if any. (17) Officer opinion. (NOTE: DO NOT PUT OPINION WITHIN ITEM 11). ❑ DISCLOSURE NOT MENTIONED The vacant property at 110 Pine Street currently has two mobile homes. This is a violation of Section 17.70-OOO(A) of the Edmonds Community Development Code. -My INVESTIGATING OFFICER SERIAL UNIT /1DDIOi nv'a �Frl�rn Leigh Francis, Code Enforcement, City of Edmonds APPROVED I ASSIGNED I DISPOSITION I STAFF I CARDED EPD•101 n ow 'I 4v+n 1 j i F I I"" V- z/--AZ EXHIBIT 2 CITY OF EDMONDS HEARING EXAMINER DATE FEE j- RE C T APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE APO'S &"� HEARING DATE: 7 10` APPLICANT• ' t (t`'j C�'Ui, rci 4 ADDRESS_ "?.s2�": 'n;j - 7' CITY & ZIP C 'k-)A3D-,��-�{ ,' �; PHONE INDICATE TYPE OR DEGREE OF INTEREST IN PROPERTY�� l�==lyC`I r1 Ur` LOCATION OR ADDRESS OF PROPERTY ��-� �'tc"np -���'-r�'�'� LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY LOT 9 VARIANCE REQUESTED: r �� cC%�'C�Gr�1-�LsY�' l!J'j ?�j t•y ` �'C k- FOR OFFICE USE ONLY: USE ZONE: ZONING ORDINANCE REQUIREMENT: S;i � �� -- zx-f=�T Release/Hold Harmless Agreement The undersigned applicant, his heirs and assigns, in consideration for. the City processing the application agrees to release, indemnify, defend and hold the City of Edmonds harmless from any and all damages and/or claims for damages, including reasonable attorneys' fees, arising from any action or inaction is based in whole or in part upon false, misleading or incomplete information furnished by the applicant, his agents or employees. Permission to Enter Subject Property The undersigned applicant grants his, her or its permission for public officials and the staff of the City of Edmonds to ent.r the subject property for the purpose of inspection and postin tCFed�t t his a� ication. Si�;natur of Applicant, Owner or Representative `^`.. ,.,,..: �-'' , �. _.::, �' > � u - W,.. L:'ism.,.�...,...�Ys.�..�..,w,w,.b.,�...ic.:..,.....s..,.,.w ..u_ � _ .... ... ....... .. ......... ,..,...__.....m.�......� ...... N DECLM ON OF APPLICANTS 1. What are the physical charactor•istics (i.e.: topography, shape of lot,ect.) which create a hardship to you in re- . gard to the development to your property ? This is a corner lot with two 25' set backs (typically most homes have one) which take up 5345 sq. ft. of the property leaving a 23' deep X 48' wide (1104 sq. ft.) area for devel- opment of a garage. (less house and unaccessible areas).T.he street level is an average of 4- to 13' below the property. 2. How does your property differ from other property in the same vicinity? Other houses in the vicinity were built with garages planned into thier setbacks. The Shields residence (built in 1925) was not planned for this type of development and setbacks. The Shields property sits an average -of 4'-13' above the. street level and is not accessible for any disabled or elderly individual. 3. Will the variance be detrimental to the public or damag- ing to other property or improvements in the vacinity? No, in fact it will enhance the values of surrounding prop- erties by removing excessive parked vehicles off the street, creating continuous continuity in the Landscape and Archi- tecture of the nieghborhood,decreasing street maintenance liabilities and costs and decrease available vandalisim and theft targets in the area. 4. What hardships Will result to you if the variance is not granted? Will the hardships have been caused by your own action? The Shields have already suffered thru several hardships. One of thier parked cars rolled downhill into a group of trees and during a recent windstorm several large branches fell on three parked cars - demolishing one.They have no safe and foul weather access from the street. The futre risks , liabilities and costs demand an alternative entrance and garage facility. 5. Can you make reasonable use of your property without the variance? The Shields can still make reasonable use of thier homes but access to from the house and parking is unsafe rendering that portion of thier property useless. ai E -Bgxvz N FT, 9 ` n tit big �o00ii Act •-^r'-4 OI got moo I; do too �-, on 4 �i - -- do to to ^• 0,111 r--------T,� to _ ot II _.-- _J- -•— ---- -- — 1. r _ T d— 1 via o%r% 0 01 9/z t 911 a 9/9 3 �.. 9/5 D 9/7 920 92o D 925 92& 9u v 923 926 m 92S 924 r 936 924 C 925 934 rn r'3 934 -1 935 940 93s 942 936 935 _ 910 . 943 944 93S p43 99.4 9 »d 949 950 917 948 999 946 9SS 958 95l 952 w 9SS f- 9S4 9SS 957 958 0' i 9,0 969 • 10TH AVE S. u 1009 1001 100E /Olt Ml 10l2 Io18 1009 lots l01D J017 1020 1015 ti 1021 /019 /024 /019 102G /Oz7 roz4 1027 /0><9 f033 f 02J1 1033 1030 l04< J039 109E 1039 1040 1040 1038 Io7G 1045 104G /o4S 1044 4 l0)7 4! /O50 1051 IOSL 1053 N 1057 iM )057 r n✓TN�- 7v - _N N N $ O0 �" opt 9533 9527 7 9511 C] 9521 n N in t- so L_ ` _ ..E%j n ..Z r, QQZS R� 9115 9331 Pat 5,3w N N O N I J. To AVE At. W N oa A iz V w 902 r. 901 910 909 N N 910 9!1 91P- 913 r 905 921 916 907 919 rn �v 910 D 921 931 934 3 924 922 929 Z p 925 � 925 929 rn .� WADE JAMES THEATER 950 1008 1010 --< 0 C' r= 935 sri g35 93G 2 ^' N 940 941 107'1 IP N. N5 943 946 945 95o� 965 948 961 952 961 N .4—_N 958 957 958 959 An 960,5 C O•rI! A, Iwo -#11 '; Y ION 1003 1004 10O I007 1_0F/_0 i c )007 1010 IDO x �0 lot(, !O1 l015 1020 N '`' x c 1019 10LL JOT V) 1031y� rpjO 1o21 1o2G —4 1027 1028 —4 102 Io35 roz9 ._ solo I..p� 1033 /031< 1033 )014 10 /035 a 1036 log3 1042 ,� 1019 1044 /041 14 109 1013 104L 1097 J062 1 051 IOSL ro55 .s�-8 ^' 1056 1058 )p55 ►OSB v f O55 �n OLYMP/C AVE 1101 W w A N L ry 4 1101 M N N i� s 970 AYE N I C C) I 9 1 7D 91J mom 1 930 t 931 2-931 934 +' 940 4i1 t1 951 93115d 945 y� 961 1 VE. 10T„ AVEi N' (n 3 C7 )00:' 1010 0 loop )DOb y m 10 1011 7 ?o/G r 1015 rn 1010 L 6 Z 3 102)023 1017 7 1030 1029 1022 �� 1021 3 S j MO 1032 1031 )030 102i (n 5 1040 1037 1031 m 55 10!10 o to Ay, OLY/M F1C N _ o. 0 0. o ►`� y N T i 1)00 p 112) °� ito3 1107 lizo � 70 -i 3 vo5 a z 1141 I 411'1'23 J140 w lllo1115z 1161N ,►�°CA w - W Y_ X 1114 i�r6 1117 T7 �' 1 -1 1 O 4� n i co N 1200 1201 A 0 1200 D J►_ N C0 j w N qj tJ� �. m l201 u - 120A �� 12TH AVE 1212 o �' N N a w w o s� 1215 / a N d ono p N o� NIG 1rp o � 0 ° N ro OR. — :-i 121= W. as 1224 .-b. 1226 ^� 1223 1132 9z21 �rNiN 9123 2110 21100 mac? o �� , rb' 0 9n2 9l30 n 9r19 2111;! 2-110 ^ $8 L VAUEY `1'��{ o 9126 91P8 — 9222 1 123a 9216, u WO 1221 ZIG N w •o w a. .]1 w • N W * 9216 w. N D i rJ a m ao z w0 AVE W. 9/22 9123 7U N N o o c W 9128 y =' " J 911g J O - p. 9119 ! '1 fx �e e r - 4 i MOKI ISCO JR DESIGN CON Design Professionals P.O. Box 47 0 SSa27882, (206)-882-4393 7-1-86 Mr. Duane V. Bowman Planning Division City of Edmonds 250 5th Avenue North Edmonds , Washington 98020 Re: Dr. And Mrs. Tim Shields 9210 Sierra Street Edmonds, Washington 98020 Dear Duane, Kirkland, WA 98033 I'am submitting the attached documents for variance. I would appreciate it if we could get an August 7th hearing date as these documents shall be in the depart- ment before the loth of July. I would also like to review my plan set with a city planner prior to submitting the completed plan for permit, this proceedure will help me become more familiar with the City of Edmonds requirements for permit review. Thankyou for your time. Sincerely, Stan M. Rochlin Representative for the Shields Documents: Check No. 1512 $125.00 ',copies of Plot Plan Application for Variance Declarations of Applicant Ajacent Property Owner List Plat Map copy 0 RT "T" Am Design Professionals Stan Rochlin PO. Box 47 ---_ ^� ._-------Kirkland, WA (206)8;;. - c: �S 98033 11 ,.. . 1 ._. _ ..._. ..... ... ... ...... . �.. ....._._ �:.:........ ... .. ,,...... .... ....._ _._ ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER LIST PLEASE LIST ALL STREET ADDRESSES OF RESIDENTS OF PROPERTY WITHIN 80 FEET OF THE PROPERTY LINES OF THE SITE, ALSO LIST NAMES AND MAILING ADDRESSES OF OWNERS OF HT ESE SAME PROPERTIES. (THIS INFORMATION MAYBE OBTAINED FROM THE COUNTY ASSESSOR S OFFICE IF A BANK IS LISTED AS OWNER, PLEASE INCLUDE LO N NUMBER NEXT TO INDIVIDUAL IS NAME.) id 1 I Sir, - � 1a � � ct2.��- h Z sTFu=�T- Ij1 r �")t- ;,� V, 1� r C7 CA) ' J I e O 3 0 3 0 O O •C dl •r) Ol N CO CO � S. OJ Ol C Ln > N > cr3 ¢ E CO ¢ 4-) ¢ ¢ 3 ¢ +3 i 3 S_ S- 3 +.) -0 3 CD -0ro 3 S-ai Q) ^ CN +-'N 4- 4J ^ 4-•r•- In r •r N S. Ol. N i Ql to O Ln 'O r Ln -0 =3 O O -0 Ln C m co C O N C r 0 LO O r O •r r 0 . N E r E M E LnM S_ N -0 S. N -0 S O T3 O O -0 a l W a l W N W t Y N W M to , p p O O.. NO 3Np OO 3N N N N N p CD O CD CD CDCO CO CC) S. • CO N L/) -0 > Ln _ > r N N rC-t�3 E co< rc$ ¢ r�¢ o¢¢ i]�-.eo3 �3 cn �3 r c •r S- 3 s 3 r� S 3 3 •, - S ra S- S- S_ ^ F- S- O r i r O ^ N QJ ^ O O C cZS •r• Ln Ql N 1 t� fi7 Cn 1 -p Ln _ QJ (n 7zi Z fn _0 QJ V) T3 r cts •r LO C >l C O r� C 0) C " • �L S_ O O i 1 r 0 S O O > r O S N O r l0 O N O J r6O E S-M S Cr E S.CV E QJ M E Or E �r E -N E �t • •r to N 'O +U CD C3 ro r T7 +-) O 0) N '0 its N -0 (n IZY .JOI W NNW J MLLJ NNW Cr30lW a OlW- OlW .�- .w�r.••in'; �i :. :•�:: �ii' .. •.Ti�•_Sp'i; � 'I� m^.\`. IS.0 I:�•- •�� `°\it � � , .•P!. ,.p fey •� I ...........��!::il': :�1%„ t .i' 1 s'.'t ;•..:':: �.:;:.• -_ 't /L } f ,� ....L (���g.. ;� 1':•: J _'. r ,SJr I f ] '' .• ..r..r. S o ,• - 1 , I • ... `2,yi r ra1, ' s/.{ •>,..,.... J lq�, t) . ;j •i •.Yi Fa•• 6 • J 1 .• ^ :..... .:J ` j1 i': ':'+ v }' xr . ;•.; 'l :: ;�' .. : �:• ' ' • bj7 F. . , L -. t. ; ( i ' i••j•�. 1 �. -:•: .......... r, '•F It ,:...: i'(I '(w�(i JF�=•` •i:..•: . jl ••' ........1« ' i I .•; iR� N' i.:. •• ;;1 , , F I .rI S..y.l .'y.1 .IL •1• •'J.u..... 1 M SrY ', ♦J'. LL. .�.II\•:.�M. 1 OV a "i i 'i-N : •::1::: :% .. a I ' :r.L' •,! •-iY:;:'::::!' •; • \ \ / rL;�tjLJt.?J." •1:'::::r.KL :,..I.....:. k• 'W I�\ Jr -S •J 1`1r a • .1L; . /`..� ?L;.«; :::::.f•F !:'. ' 1. '.i4uS .'s ,a':.:•:: ::' � *'� yo 'rJ wTi ' .,�NJ .;:.F%� �:.1:: J..L: r 1 •.• },. A'+•/�._T_ .i. -,.i : ,i: ,L '�'`�i 1'r�•�1. / •• 1-` :.•:'::' 't� :l :'.g•.'.'.'a ' Q/ L J :rl";:r��-.l%;T :yf�: i• tI•.i:i•'1.::.::'1.�•':".:S':�:n i��•+'l t1 i l;*-till t•` : 1 Yl r� •Y: 'i.' "l V�;:%{.I3 `t ) rY.%•- ��': '.'ln:;'� .:: �w :.f' S• �,.rKtr j } «� r - RECEIVED /laf JUL 17 1986 .. CITY OF EDMONDS REC� :t\ t J /yEQ J c"l ty®fEdmondsP�/ 8p; 8`/ - '' INTER OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE -r Bobb ls P.W. - K71 'GaryyMcComas - _`Fire Dan `Smith/Jerry.Hauth - Engineering Duane Bowman July 14, 1986 1%4 Sri ' TO '` FROM DATE SUBJECT It V-21-86 VARIANCE TO REDUCE 25' REQULRED..STREET SETBACK TO 191 TOR GARAGE ';AT 9210'SIERRA STREET (.RS-12) I Id 11 1 i HEARING` DATE: AUGUST 745 1986 a 1 \ , p. PLEASE RESPOND WITH YOU R'COMMENTS NO LATER THAN JULY 283 1986t I .THANKS J , .. ♦ .. f • 1 _ 1. .. . - ! 1 +.., s [ I It- r�4Laltt�t ,r[At [ .i i, 1 ! A.wTllt)t 1 4e t ♦ tt\ t I'` J t j 1'.: h T .d 4 t44,ylt �t•y try.„ l.It [ .Yr v;fl+[ �i<7AY µ°i i♦J %.. r i h7 (fii IIF4'`. iryh t, is ... Ir�ic.i .i'1'ySA"p'�Z'w t-.ryl iYi .4` h.1 _ t• r\ c.. i ! - { A+', 4 }li t ! t F 4 \ �• 1 . 9 F )4 li. llA 1 !L Y M'\+tI YINJ C• l . \' �I 1 1 `ly FI'S•t f 1 [ H[ li. i[Yti ft. C[':Krt �V \�: I 'l a!'.V♦t a 1 tl 'a <r 5^ '.\� )1:; It1 11 �^ Y )� ! i•�w ' a. 1 .:. r f i. _ .. n •i4-!�L.�xJ�JI `Li "t'Ira :.3}♦v\,bft tl-t rl L };r♦ .l.ca, r1 � i Y� t .f. '•iA41 '.t( ., ... ti �"_ .1t �MJ f. ��i'f'{t �K�1r Yy:�.ts �iy .,� f4. .-tT•4 i} e .4� .f 1 .. J.l; .i.l. ll:bU. 1. f f 4...� , t.._ ♦: V t'•i 1'� Yli iL -.!! w,'..,1...h w1 [ tl -,:.ta . n.ta.'Ystx r! (i^:r�. r.l it,5i� t.i4. �t l}� i il,[1 ���l ui IG It l a . 'i Y�T'�i. • it f r )1 (4 YY .+ 1.d.fi. l.1 2tt. A- yt 1 a. i',''�.yv [ 1..Y �v it"\ y f.f �SIS�t.t i:lf. v. i _tf�.µs E: 1 it +.L[ti"{.. V./tF. f"Y�t}1.•fiR /rIY� Jt r�. 7,.'� �..'\ it..4S. ,w` t..l .-•�' ..: I.,.:'i ..?L � i 1 ..l ) [ntt•!( Lf: n1 I♦ '`,. 5 a. ... L�rlr 1 �>�1 � 7 Y' "t �� .. .. L .. t or nL ... r ..✓=[v� rrcLx [a r. •r. Tw us.Ca. �..� • - ♦ n Yrti 0.1 h'(r1 ht, , „r r [ it< 4C it 4 1 ti.f v p. J'}, 1� t 'tt• J ,, r '� a%t ^.! . .. `.. "flh7R n,:y s11' I.rli �:•y'�arnl..r°i�r S.� f..7::i.L'� 4. t,Yi�M�H ..' Mi !\_J! J\.Y J'./A.R1�F ... �. ri. �. f•S).ti ., I. rr _1��...�1..� 1 �i?i♦t 1 i^... i -MML•.kLf �xu X of 71 RECEfVED J U L 14 1986 ♦ ENGINEERING I (� r`ctY!}'v�Fpf+ r�'Tvc♦, ♦r.rR � ' ' i4f�rt 1m •,f.��i i♦,� Jam^-•!• �'.. .. � - � .. 4�a'SEHIv City of Edmonds ♦ti'Y�cS f hvi4�l� ♦'>y�ll t� r i � + .. r, INTER OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE Bobby,Mills P.W: G ry McComas'`- Fire aan rSmit" h/Jerry Hauth' Engineering Duane Bowman July 14, 1986 TO �:,' . FROM DATE SUBJECT., =i V 21'86 VARIANCE TO REDUCE•25' REQUIRED -STREET SETBACK TO 19'�FOR GARAGE AT 9210..SIERRA STREET (RS-121 HEARING' DATE: AUGUST 7, 1986 PLEASE RESPOND..WITH YOUR'COMMENTS•NO LATER THAN JULY 285 1986. THANKS. It 1 A 'H 1`+t t lu a•c v ..t sl t l I� ♦ �"� F J Vv� i.V ♦ ��" �' : .• y , 3, ::v ?'�'tii: f �. i 11•ine +. tJ'.jl Tt v r LF 137 tfr4 t� ♦ .I ;, �.• tl,;c� t �+ r ,It + { I + r !. . LF 1 F J. �. !� .r♦Y34t ! l h 1 L ♦ tf • t'h:.r ♦ x l �' ♦ J + Itf! ! ♦ '.a �1 � 4! Ii', a Q .. 6� (} �, ma I ( �, 1 i � t>: -iM1 �: 4 � t t 1 c t 6i ✓� 0 -4t W -! ♦ r{1:x'�1♦ � � .,F i'ji1` ,}... l .� ti1 �i'Sor i.+6JT♦ - �eY y'.;u;�! � n• A,r _17•'rf• r+n �).jti,r. .. :{ .•.l , C t '. cd� �}ct�.:� ! - •yt�i� . �` �rJ1 s�•e '�. t 4:�"t�''.}n ,ie° , ;i�<^ pj?''.Lo Y; ?ir 4"�.e. Q. •t. u.•} j,+rt t:�.cr..}�f 4 � {ry 1Y.r 1. � '. r; JN � �LL 9 rb[ k '' S .i�;�� i :t w. t`.. r .r . is t F �, � irc, :r.,y'r l:.il f.1 ce Jr'R.,r • t,. iTV I'fti , i ` ,.. flt}'K.NA 1.. '-'gyS i:.zt•l.J.�l1 r5t .T, !i.�rC:�('�}'1 f t.l^ate 1 : �� , .__ IMF C, ♦ �,�t, 1 41�. ♦t -t '� I n t:. }Il ! li �rt i., •i. .. :i�'. 17v.�aJ[:SFi :LTt�•ry.i.if:i'.h 4�Tf�`U�♦T��LNftlT.. gk't��4 K.a .. .... .. }. .. ^�it4S�h I`{F , .q. 4.1i.{R'i 4' r' �w ..�. fdn... al'�d... .., a ��:.�.. .�'����. ,.. t q Y + City of P.WINTER-OFFICE .", I a McComas.. -Fire' Dan .Smith/Jerry, Hauth `- En Ineeri ng TO:> FROM. Edmonds CORRESPONDENCE Duane Bowman RECEIVED J U L 2 3 1986 CITY OF EDMONDS DATE July 14,-1986 V 21-86 'STREET SETBACK TO 19' FOR GARAGE VARIANCE TO REDUCE-25' REQUIRED AT 9210 SIERRA STREET (RS-12) > HEARING DATE: AUGUST 7, 1986 PLEASE RESPOND WITH YOUR'COMMENTS NO LATER THAN JULY 285 1986. THANKS. l t ED J U L ILL 1986 :EDMONDS FIRE DEPTa .t{O'nC�,t,�`y� < P � t ♦ v R ILL{< 'i y.'e ,a i n ,: +� y '+.Iy I a• ` �A " K y�� �i"it�-1`i.�'♦H �?iN��t�i4r v�Srild<I ��I?Jf{ ..�... ..r. t.... .... i. .. +n .. :.. �., n.,.. ..n... .. +. ti F. !< r ° Ir f4 Y• sir` �! Z�p 5 �� r ' � 3,. ,. THE HEARING EXAMINER WILL HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING THURSDAY, AUGUST 7, 19 86 _, ON THE FOLLOWING APPLICATION: FILE NO. V-21-86 VARIANCE TO REDUCE REQUIRED 25' STREET SETBACK TO 19' TO ALLOW GARAGE ADDITION, PROPERTY ADDRESS AND LOCATION 9210 SIERRA STREET ZONE DISTRICT RS-12 THE HEARING WILL BEGIN AT 7:30 P.M., IN THE PLAZA MEETING ROOM, LIBRARY BUILDING, 650 MAIN STREET, EDMONDS, WASHINGTON. IF YOU WISH TO COMMENT ON THIS PROPOSAL, YOU MAY COME TO THE HEARING AND SPEAK. YOU MAY ALSO WRITE A LETTER STATING YOUR VIEWS WHICH WILL BE CONSIDERED AT THE HEARING. PLEASE ADDRESS THE LEI -TER TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND INCLUDE THE ABOVE FILE NUMBER. IF THE ITEM IS CONTINUED TO ANOTHER HEARING BECAUSE THE AGENDA IS NOT COMPLETED, OR FURTHER INFORMATION IS NEEDED, THE DATE OF THE CONTINUED HEARING WILL BE ANNOUNCED ONLY AT THE MEETING. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION MAY BE OBTAINED AT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, 250 FIFTH AVENUE NORTH, EDMONDS (PHONE 771-3202, EXTENSION 252). THE REMOVAL, MUTILATION, DESTRUCTION, OR WAR"NFAMN CONCEALMENT OF THIS NOTICE BEFORE THE, DATE INC)h In OF THE HEARING IS A MISDEMEANOR PUNISHABLE BY FINE AND IMPRISONMENT. THIS NOTICE MAY BE REMOVE® AFTER AUGUST 7, 1986 pad, n llu&d 71zel& :... .. ,.. ..-..._...:a..,,,.+w..-ii....^r .. .,...vu, ....,..,:ri, �.......w>s...'.. t, -::s _.,....: �.::�.�.., .. � ..., ....:::. ._. .a..._._... .. .,....._.. .n...,.. __... .. _ .. .... .__ AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ss. COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH ) Susan Painter deposes and says: V-21-86 FILE NO. APPLICANT Tim & Laura Shields being first duly sworn, on oath That on the 28th day of duly ,19 00 , the attached Notice of Public Hearing was mailed as required to adjacent property owners, the names of which were provided by the applicant. Signed je �� � Subscribed and sworn to before me this 4 �day ofL 19. Notary Public in and for the. State of Washington. Residing at 4k 0 STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss. COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH ) Duane .Bowman FILE NO. V-21-86 APPLICANT Tim & Laura Shields AFFIDAVIT OF POSTER being first duly sworn, on oath, deposes and says: That on the 28th day of July 19 86 , the attached Notice of Public Hearing was posted as prescribed by Ordinance, and in any event, in the Frances Anderson Center and Civic Center, and where applicable on or near the subject property. Signed �;. x t� eu —� Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of 19 . Notary Public in and for the State of Washington. Residing at �� My, COMMISSION EXPIM 6.1649. 0 EXHIBIT LIST V-21-86 EXHIBIT 1 - STAFF REPORT EXHIBIT 2 - APPLICATIOWDECLARATIONS EXHIBIT 3 - SITE PLAN EXHIBIT 4 - VICINITY MAP 4 EXHIBIT 1 STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER FILE: V-21-86 HEARING DATE: August 7, 1986 I. REQUESTED ACTION: ck to Variance to rduce the garagereet additia onnat 92109 allow Sierra Street, Edmonds. II. APPLICANT/OWNER: Tim & Laura Shields 9210 Sierra Street Edmonds, WA 98020 III. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: See Exhibit 2 IV. STAFF FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: A. Description of the Subject Property and Surrounding The subject property is a 12,516 sq. ft. lot located on the southwest corner of Sierra Street and 92nd Ave. W. There is an existing residence located on the property, as shown in Exhibit 3. The Applicant desires to build a garage addition onto the eastern side of the existing residence. Presently, there is no covered parking on the site. The proposed addition would include a second story above the garage. In order to access the garage from the house, a stairway is needed which necessitates the variance request. Surrounding development is single family residential. B. Official Street Map proposed R/W East - 92nd Ave. W. 50' North - Sierra Street 50' C. Conformance to Chapter 20.85.010 Existing R/W 50' 50' Staff Report Page 2 V-21-86 1. Special Circumstances Special circumstances do appear to exist in this particular case. The lot is a corner lot and sits up above both streets and the property to the west. To put the driveway in any other location would require a greater amount of grading. 2. Special Privilege The proposed variance does appear to represent a grant of special privilege. 3. Comprehensive Plan The Comprehensive Policy Plan map designates the subject property and surrounding area as Low Density Residential. The proposed variance, does not appear to conflict with the purposes of the Comprehensive Plan. 4. Zoning Ordinance The subject property, as well as the surrounding area., is zoned RS-12. The proposed variance does not appear to conflict with the purposes of the zoning ordinance or the RS-12 zone district. 5. Not Detrimental The proposed variances does not appear to pose any significant impact to the public or to any near by private property or improvement. No view will be impacted if the variance is granted. 6. Minimum Variance The requested variance does appear to represent a minimum variance request. V. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: It is the recommendation of the staff that V-21-86 be approved in that it conforms to the review criteria of Chapter 20.85.10 C Lt PLEASE PRINT YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS BELOW IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM AND/OR WISH TO RECEIVE A COPY OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S FINDINGS OF FACT V-21-86 DR. TIM AND LAURA SHIELDS Variance to reduce the 25' street setback to 19' to allow garage addition at 9210 Sierra Street. NAME ADDRESS 1 lqgO;Z q Z. i S. et 2- D - ''`^•�_...__•� REUE(`'- CITY OF EDMONDS 250 5th AVE. N. • EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 9B020 • (206) 771.3202 CIU Of EDMONDS LARRY S. NAUGHTEN MAYOR .o HEARING EXAMINER, FINDINGS AND DECISION OF THE HEARING EXAMINER OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION FILE: V-21-86 OF TIM AND LAURA SHIELDS FOR APPROVAL OF A VARIANCE DECISION: The variance is granted subject to the conditions listed. INTRODUCTION Tim and Laura Shields, 9210 Sierra Street, Edmonds, Washington, 98020, and hereinafter referred to as Applicants, have requested approval of a variance for a reduction of the street setbacks on property located at 9210 Sierra Street, Edmonds, Washington, and more particularly des- cribed as: Lot 9, Sierra Highlands, according to the plat thereof recorded in Volume 24, Plat 56, Snohomish County, Washington. a reduction of the 25 foot required The specific variance request was street setbacks for the allowance of a 19 foot street setback on the subject property. A hearing was held on the request on August 7, 1986. At the public hearing the following presented testimony and evidence: Mary Lou Block City of Edmonds Planning Department Edmonds, WA 98020 Stan Rockland 3834 175th NE Edmonds, WA 98020 Tim Shields 9210 Sierra Street Edmonds, WA 98020 Laura Capolla 2033 92nd West Edmonds, WA 98020 At the hearing the following exhibits were submitted and admitted as part of the official record of this proceeding: Exhibit 1 - Staff Report If 2 - Application/Declaration " 3 - Site Plan 4 - Vicinity Map 5 - Rendering of Garage 6 - Floor Plan 0 Findings and Decision of the Hearing Examiner of the City of Edmonds Re: V-21-86 Page 2 After due consideration of the evidence presented by the Applicants; evidence elicited during the public hearing; and, as a result of the personal inspection -of the subject property and surrounding area by the Hearing Examiner, the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions constitute the basis of the decision of the Hearing Examiner. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The application is for a request for the reduction of the 25 foot street setback to a 19 foot street setback at 9210 Sierra Street, Edmonds, Washington. (Block testimony) 2. Subject property is zoned RS-12. Section 16.20.030 ECDC sets forth the requirement that minimum street setback for RS-12 property is 25 feet. It is from this Section of the zoning code that the Ap- plicants seek a variance. (Block testimony) 3. Section 20.85.010 of the ECDC sets forth the criteria for the grant- ing of the variance. These criteria include: A. Because of the special circumstances relating to the property, the strict enforcement of the zoning ordinance would deprive the owner of use rights and privileges permitted to other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning. B. The approval of the variance would not be a grant of special privilege to the property in comparison with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning. C. The approval of the variance will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Edmonds. D. The approval of the variance will be consistent with the purposes of the zoning ordinance and the zone district in which the property is located. E. The variance as approved or conditionally approved will not be significantly detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare or injurious to the property or improve- ments in the vicinity and same zone. F. The requested variance is the minimum necessary to allow the owner the rights enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning. (ECDC) 4. The subject property consists of 12,516 square feet. It is located on the Southwest corner of Sierra Street and 92nd Avenue West. The -residence on the subject property is located at an elevated area that is 6 feet above the street level of 92nd Avenue West 0 I'm J,r V .v.e..,., �.. �+.-�•a l......axS s4�w..�.: 1.11... .. .�... ...�..«., n_.. ... a. .� , �... .. ... . �.�.�... .. .... ,_.. .....K » .. .... ..... . ....... ......W�—�--•��•+� Findings and Decision of the Hearing Examiner of the City of Edmonds Re: V-21-86 Page 3 and 13 feet above the street level of Sierra Street. It is the intent of the Applicants to build a garage addition on the eastern side of the residence. (Staff report) 5. Because of the difficulty in providing access from the garage to the residence onsite it will be necessary for the Applicant to.construct a stairway. The stairway is designed to run parallel to the house. The location of the stairway will necessitate an intrusion of the street setback. Thus, the Applicants seek the reduction of the 6 feet from the street setback standards. (Block testimony) 6. The subject property is a corner lot. Because of its elevation above the streets it is unique to the area. If the Applicants were to construct the garage in areas outside the setbacks, significant cuts would be required. (Rockland testimony) 7. The granting of the variance will not be the grant of special privileges. With the construction of the garage and stairway as proposed the access to the garage would be further from the inter- section of 92nd Avenue West and Sierra Street and will have less impact on traffic. (Rockland testimony) 8. The Comprehensive Policy Plan Map designates the subject property as low density residential. (Staff report) 9. The requested variance does not pose any significant impact to the public nor to nearby private properties or improvements. No views will be impacted. (Staff report) 10. Adjoining property owners testified to be in support of.granting the variance. (Capolla testimony) 11. The Planning',Department of the City of Edmonds has recommended approval of the variance. CONCLUSION 1. The application is for the approval of a variance to reduce the required 25 foot street setback to 19 feet in order to allow the construction of a garage addition and stairway at 9210 Sierra Street, Edmonds, Washington. 2. In order for a variance to be granted within the City of Edmonds the criteria as set forth in Section 20.85,010 must be satisfied. These criteria are satisfied by the instant application. 3. Special circumstances exist for the granting of the variance. The elevation of the subject property necessitates the granting of the reduction of the setback. This is a more logical approach than re- quiring cuts to be made on the property in order to satisfy the setback standards. Findings and Decision of the Hearing Examiner of the City of Edmonds Re: V-21-86 Page 4 4. The granting of a variance will not be the grant of a special privilege. Fewer traffic hazards will be created with the use of the variance. 5. The requested variance is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Edmonds. 6. The requested variance is consistent with the purposes of the zoning code of the City of Edmonds and particular the purposes of the RS-12 zone. 7. The requested variance does not impact public nor other private properties or improvements. 8. The requested variance is the minimum necessary to adequately de- velop the property in a manner similiar to other properties in the area. DECISION Based upon the preceding Findings of Fact and Conclusions; the testimony and evidence submitted at the public hearing; and, upon the impressions of the Hearing Examiner at a site view, it is hereby ordered that the variance to reduce the 25 foot street setback to a 19 foot street setback for the property located at 9.210 Sierra Street, Edmonds, Washington, is granted subject to the following conditions: 1. The Applicants are to secure all necessary permits prior to construction. 2. Construction is to be conducted in a manner that is consistent with the plans as submitted by the Applicants. Any change in plans should be reviewed by the Planning Department of the City of Edmonds. 3. The variance should be recorded with Snohomish County. DONE AND DATED this ,,; `,� day of August, 1986. 'JAMES M. DRISCO'LL Hearing Examiner NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL Written appeals alleging specific error of fact or other grounds for appeal may be filed with the Planning Department, City of Edmonds, Civic Center, Edmonds, Washington, 98020, within fourteen days of the date of the Hearing Examiner's final action. In this matter any appeal must be received by the Department prior to 5:00 P.M. on September 8, 1986. 0 ow S r EXHIBIT: 2' FILL t1-17_-8�e CITY OF EDMONDS HEARING EXAMINER APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE APPLICANT Charles F. Perrenoud CI="i & ZIP Edmonds, WA 98020 DATE_ Li�lra�d �G' FEE f _�07) RE C T APO' S G� HEARING DATE: ADDRESS 931 Sprague St. It4:=CATE TYPE OR DEGREE OF INTEREST IN PROPERTY LOC =TION OR ADDRESS OF PROPERTY LE'.L DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY VARIANCE REQUESTED: 831 Sprague St. PHONE 771_0/492 Owner Lots 28 and 29, Block 81, City of Fdmonds Reduction of rear setback from 15 feet to 10 feet 'rote: there is an existing carport within the area (10 feet from alley) FOR OFFICE USE ONLY: USE ZONE: ZONING ORDINANCE REQUIREMENT: Release/Hold Harmless Agreement T e undersigned applicant, his heirs and assigns, in consideration for t::e City processing the application agrees to release, indemnify, defend and ho'd the City of Edmonds harmless from any and all damages and/or claims for damages, including reasonable attorneys' fees, arising from any action or inaction is based in whole or in part upon false, misleading or incomplete in=ormation furnished by the applicant, his agents or employees. Permission to Enter Subject Property The undersigned applicant grants his, her or its permission for public o==icials and the staff of the City of Edmonds to enter the subject property for the purpose of inspection and posting attendant to this applic tion. e �� ignature of Applicant, 0 ner or Representative 0 DECLARATIONS OF APPLICANT Please answer all questions 1. What are the physical characteristics, (i.e. topography, shape of lot, etc.) which create a hardship for you in regard to development of your property? The physical characteristics of the lot do not create a hardship. We wish to improve the existing carport, which apparently was constructed prior to our aquisition without the required permits and varience. The improvments would consist of enclosing the carport and rebuilding, the roof into a deck and enclosed storage space. 2. How does your property differ from other property in the same vicinity? Most of the people on the alley have fences on the property line. The property directly behind ours has a two -car carport next to a detached storage building which extends to their property alley line. There are two other garages accessed via the alley. 3. Will this variance be detrimental to the public or damaging to other property or improvements in the vicinity? I do not believe the improvements would be detrimental to any of the adjacent property or property residents. I believe that repairing the exis ng s trueture will increase a value of our property and t erefore _ enhance the value and saleability of our neighbors" homes. I have spoken to most of the neighbors and all have encouraged us to make improvments. 4. What hardships will result to you if the variance is not granted? Will these hardships have been caused by your own action? I£ the variance is not granted the longest garage or carport that could be built is less than 18 feet, too small to park even our small subaru and be able to walk around the end of the car. It is my understanding that I cannot even repair the existing structure which needs a new roof without approval of the variance. 5. Can you make reasonable use of your property without the variance? Without the variance the use of our property would have to change. I might build an attached or dettached storage building. but I would not have reasonable space for a carport. f�_ VICINITY MAP, SPRAGUE EDMOMDS SITE PLAN SCALE I"• 101-0'1 kirkcrlr-IE-NT A LE6iAL DESCQPTION : LOTS ZS AND 29 , BUX.{C BI ) CITY OF SNOHOMI%A COUNTY, STATE OF- CVASIIINE %U. KNO\VN AS 831 SPRAC-,UE S;. I F-t>KDNCS - : I ATTACHMENT C Names and Addresses of the Property Owners Within 80 feet of Subject Property Washington Federal Savings and Loan #200 53398-7 Renqqist, George A. 425 Pike St. 15, S 33d Seattle, WA 98101 Washington Mutual Savings Bank L I Bailey, A. F. #010080172403 1101 2nd Ave. Seattle, WA 98101 Yvonne VanHoosen Lo 837 Sprague St. Edmonds, WA 98020 Continental Inc. 3artkiewicz, Brian A. # o66604-H 8th Floor Pacific Building Seattle, WA 98104 University Federal Savings and Loan --urnutt, B.E. J90-213-03509-1 6400 Roosevelt Way NE Seattle, WA 98115 L( Lo Fred 0. and JoAnn M. Olson 844 Daley Edmonds, WA 98020 Continental Inc. <zi I/ Adams, Douglas G. #70463-H 8th Floor Pacific Building Seattle, WA 98104 L o-.1 W. F. Wolf 836 Daley Edmonds, WA 98020 L Washington Mutual Savings Bank Droppert, Randy 63810 0 1101 2nd Ave Seattle, WA 98101 0 Wash. Fed. Svgs & Loan Renquist, George #200 53398-7 425 Pike Street Seattle, WA 98101 George Renquist/Resident 821 Sprague Street Edmonds', WA 9 80 20 Wash. Mutual Savings Bank Bailey, A.F. #010080172403 1101 2nd Ave. Seattle, WA 981.01 A.F. Bailey/Resident 825 Sprague Street Edmonds, WA 93020' Yvonne VanHoosen/Resident 837 Sprague Street Edmonds, WA 98020 Continental Inc. Bartkiewicz, Brian #066604-H 8th Floor Pacific Bldg. Seattle, WA 98104 Brian A. Bartkiewicz/ Resident 843 Sprague Street Edmonds, WA 98020 Fred & JoAnn M. Olson �f 344 Daley Street Edmonds, WA 98020 F. Continental Inc. Adams, Douglas #70463-H 8th Floor Pacific Bldg. Seattle, I4A 98104 Douglas Adams/Resident 840 Daley Street Edmonds, WA 98020 W.F. Wolf/Resident 836 Daley Street ! Edmonds, WA 98020 l Wash. Mutual Svgs. Bank Droppert, Randy #0 1-804-063869-2 � 1101 2nd Ave. Seattle, WA 98101 Randy Droppert/Resident 818 Daley Street Edmonds, WA 98020 b Charles E. Perrenoud 831 Sprague Street Edmonds, WA 98020 University Fed. Svgs & Loan Curnutt, B.E. #90-213-03509-1-- 6400 Roosevelt Way N.E. Seattle, WA 98115 B.E. Curnutt/Resident 849 Sprague Street Edmonds, WA. 98020 0 .. INTER -OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE Jerry Hauth/Dan 'Emg+leeri Mg Bobby, -.Mills - Public Works Duane Bowman 4�/17/86 TO . Gary..McComas - Fire Marshal �/ FROM DATE 8UBJECT..': r 12 86 VARIANCE TO REDUCE REAR SETBACK FROM REQUIRED 15 FEET TO. 10 FEET AT 831 SPRAGUE ,STREET (RS-6) HEARING DATE: .MAY 15, 1986 PLEASE RESPOND WITH YOUR COMMENTS NO LATER THAN MAY 1, 1986.RECEIVED THANKS. A r PUBLIC klOR1(S RECEIVV. APR 17 1886 EDMONDS FIRE DFPi �I(Ifil+1'� V 1yAt 1114�T 1 ,.,A Vy}1� -of Edmonds `�iiut.1/YtiMt�t7+1y `h5}r. 4' :kVA •..L= •:.City. INTER -OFFICE ORRESPONDENCE '*-Jerry Hauth/Dan L Bobby. Mills -.- Publ i c Works Gary., McComas - Fire Marshal FROM Duane Bowman DATE 4'/17/86 SUBJECT TA1 t , fr14 y V 12 86 VARIANCE- TO, REDUCE REAR SETBACK FROM REQUIRED 15 FEET TO. 10 FEET „' AT 831 SPRAGUE'STREET (RS-6) ' HEARING DATE : . MAY 15; •1986 PLEASE RESPOND WITH YOUR COMMENTS NO LATER THAN MAY 1, 1986. THANKS. RECEIVED Alb No APR 17 1886 ENGINEERING G.% ('c, �j=9`� sly: d•'.c,� � E— r 0 A I r J Colty of Edmonds INTER -OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE ii t1i 51+� rra (Y=}rt'{'^f}t ram} J i a ,l t r- t tnf Jerry: Hauth/Dan ' Bobby -:Mills Public Works ✓ �X' Gary. McComas ` = Fire Marshal FROM Duane Bowman DATE 4/17/86 Sr r T t t.dy iw, 1 iSt ttt '( r 1 i nr SUBJECT t! a r 13-2�Mt�t'Y Ytl � Ry ' j i °• i /t.lr ' VARIANCE TO REDUCE REAR SETBACK FROM REQUIRED 15 FEET TO.10 FEET T�r k:,�<�°a�y=a���;�Yf� ;�; ��><,/�; 1 'r t •' 'AT 831 SPRAGUE STREET (RS-6) .ta 3�N,i� fi •fir C c,. M .Cvt jt Ft���YYi �ItIF )J iu n ✓ ,r Yh - ''�` HEARING DATE : . MAY 15 � �1986 1 JG tr S. fi) PLEASE RESPOND WITH YOUR COMMENTS NO:LATER THAN MAY 1, 1986. THANKS. 1 RECEIVED ANZ 17 '�acic7 t PUBLIC WORKS )'t+�,�i' S- r .c n rm •L + "� 1 c t^ r 'M rr .7 +M�t y � CITY OF EDMONDS A 4 Los I .9-jil Troll U-1 z- THE HEARING EXAMINER WILL HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING THURSDAY, MAY 15 19 86 ON THE FOLLOWING APPLICATION: FILE* NO. V-12-86 - VA-IANCE TO REDUCE THE REQUIRED REAR SETBACK FROM 15' TO 10' TO ALLOW AN ADDITION TO A RESIDENCE, PROPERTY ADDRESS AND LOCATION 831 SPRAGUE STREET ZONE DISTRICT RS-6 THE HEARING WILL BEGIN AT 7.30 P.M., IN THE PLAZA MEETING ROOM, LIBRARY BUILDING, 650 MAIN STREET, EDMONDS, WASHINGTON. IF YOU WISH TO COMMENT ON THIS PROPOSAL, YOU MAY COME TO THE HEARING AND SPEAK. YOU MAY ALSO WRITE A LETTER STATING YOUR VIEWS WHICH WILL BE CONSIDERED AT THE HEARING. PLEASE ADDRESS THE LETTER TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND INCLUDE THE ABOVE FILE NUMBER. IF THE ITEM IS CONTINUED TO ANOTHER HEARING BECAUSE THE AGENDA IS NOT COMPLETED, OR FURTHER INFORMATION IS NEEDED, THE DATE OF THE CONTINUED HEARING WILL BE ANNOUNCED ONLY AT THE MEETING. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION MAY BE OBTAINED AT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, 250 FIFTH AVENUE NORTH, EDMONDS (PHONE 771-3202, EXTENSION 252). THE REMOVAL, MUTILATION, DESTRUCTION, OR WARNING CONCEALMENT OF THIS NOTICE BEFORE THE DATE ■ OF THE HEARING IS A MISDEMEANOR PUNISHABLE BY FINE AND IMPRISONMENT. THIS NOTICE MAY BE REMOVED AFTER MAY 15, 1986 posed a maw 515186 FILE NO. V-12-86 APPLICANT Charles Perrenoud AFFIDAVIT OF POSTER STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss. COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH ) Duane Bowman being first duly sworn, on oath, deposes and says: That on the 5 th day of May 19 86 the attached Notice of Public Hearing was posted as prescribed by Ordinance, and in any event, in the Frances Anderson Center and Civic Center, and where applicable on or near the subject property. Signed Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of 19 A . Notary Public in and for the State of Washington. Residing at Mx COMMISSION EXPIRES 6-16-89. AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ss. COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH_ ) Susan Painter deposes and says: FILE NO. V-12 - 86 APPLICANT Charles Perrenoud being first duly sworn, on oath That on the Sth day of May ,19 86, the attached Notice of Public Hearing was mailed as required to adjacent property owners, the names of which were provided by the applicant. Signed Subscribed and sworn to before me this ,f? day of C')n -e, 19 Notary Public in and for the State of Washington. Residing MY COMMISSION EXPIRES 6-16.89. 0 i . I Yvonne Van Hoosen 837 Sprague Street Edmonds, WA 98020 May 15, 1986 City of Edmonds Hearing Examiner 205 5th Avenue North Edmonds, WA 98020 Re: File Number V-12-86 Dear Sir: I am an owner and occupier of a home adjoining 831 Sprague Street, and I object to the variance being requested in the above - referenced file. If granted, the proposed structure will not only be closer to property lines than the existing one already is, but will also have a deck on top of it that will deprive me of my privacy in both my home and my yard. This will not only interfere with my enjoyment of my home and privacy, but will also adversely effect its value. For the reasons set forth above, I ask that the requested variance be denied. Sincerely, Yvonne Van Hoosen u k, THIS PACKET SENT TO HEARING .-- EXAMINER ON MAY 8, 1986 EXHIBIT LIST V-12-86 EXHIBIT 1 - STAFF REPORT EXHIBIT 2 - APPLICATION/DECLARATIONS EXHIBIT 3 - VICINITY MAP EXHIBIT 4 - PLOT PLAN EXHIBIT 1 STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER FILE: V-12-86 HEARING DATE: May 15, 1986 I. REQUESTED ACTION: Variance to reduce the required 15' rear setback to 10' for a proposed addition to the residence at 831 Sprague Street, Edmonds. II. APPLICANT/OWNER: Charles Perrnoud 831 Sprague Street Edmonds, WA 98020 III. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: See Exhibit 2 IV. STAFF FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: A. Description of the Subject Property and Surrounding Area The subject property is located on the north side of Sprague Street. The is an existing residence which is located approximately 43' from the Sprague Street right-of-way. Access to the carport on the rear of the home is by way of a 15' alley. The lot is relatively level. It is the applicants intent to remove the existing carport and build a new garage in its place, expanding slightly to the west (See Exhibit 4). Surrounding development is all single family residential. B. Official Street Map Proposed R/W Existing R/W North - Alley 15' 15' East - Sprague Street 60' 60' C. Conformance to Chapter 20.85.010 1. Special Circumstances 0 Special circumstances do not appear to exist in this particular case to allow the addition. 2. Special Privilege The proposed variance does not appear to represent a grant of special privilege. There are other structures located on or near the alley. 3. Comprehensive Plan The Comprehensive Policy Plan map designates the subject property, as well as the surrounding area, as Low Density Residential. The proposed variance does not appear to conflict with the purposes of the Comprehensive Plan. 4. Zoning Ordinance The subject property, as well as the surrounding area, is zoned RS-6. The proposed variance does not appear to conflict with the purposes of the zoning ordinance or the RS-6 zone district. 5. Not Detrimental The proposed variance does not appear to pose any significant impact to the public nor to any nearby private property or improvement. 6. Minimum Variance The requested variance does appear to represent a minimum variance request. V. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Even though the request does not appear to meet all the variance criteria, the staff does not oppose the variance request. PLEASE PRINT YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS BELOW IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM AND/OR WISH TO RECEIVE A COPY OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S FINDINGS OF FACT V-12-86 CHARLES PERRENOUD Variance to reduce the required 15' rear setback to 10' for a residential addition at 831 Sprague Street. PLEASE PRINT NAME C-I*v-,IX-,S P OU D orb.-- 1�- _ce1v CITY OF EDMONDS LARRY S. NAUGHTEN 11 11 MAYOR 250 5th AVE. N. • EDMONDS. WASHINGTON 96020 • (206) 771.3202 V 161986 HEARING EXAMINER vj- EDMOI�` FINDINGS AND DECISION OF THE HEARING EXAMINER OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION FILE: V-12-86 OF CHARLES PERRENOUD FOR APPROVAL OF A VARIANCE DECISION: The variance is denied. INTRODUCTION Charles Perrenoud, 831 Sprague Street, Edmonds, Washington, 98020, and hereinafter referred to as Applicant, has requested a variance for the reduction of the required rear setback on property located at 831 Sprague Street, Edmonds, Washington, and more particularly described as: Lots 28 and 29; Block 81, City of Edmonds. The specific variance request is for a reduction of the 15-foot rear setback to a 10-foot rear setback for a proposed addition to the residence located on the subject property. A hearing on the request was held before the Hearing Examiner of the City of Edmonds on May 15, 1986. At the hearing the following presented testimony and evidence: Duane Bowman Planning Dept. City of Edmonds Edmonds, WA 98020 Yvonne Van Hoosen 837 Sprague St. Edmonds, WA 98020 Charles Perrrenoud 831 Sprague Street Edmonds, WA 98020 At the hearing the following exhibits were submitted and admitted as part of the official record of this proceeding: Exhibit 1 - Staff Report 11 2 - Application/Declarations Is 3 - Vicinity Map to 4 - Plot Plan 5 - Pictures submitted by Applicant 6 - Van Hoosen Letter u a I Findings and Decision of the Hearing Examiner of the City of Edmonds Re: V-12-86 Page 2 Subsequent to the hearing and pursuant to the authority granted by the Hearing Examiner, the Applicant submitted an additional letter. This additional letter is admitted into the record and is identified as Exhibit 7. After due consideration of the evidence presented by the Applicant; evidence elicited during the public hearing; and, as a result of the personal inspection of the subject property and surrounding areas by the Hearing Examiner, the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions constitute the basis of the decision of the Hearing Examiner. FINDINGS OF' FACT 1. The application is for the approval of a reduction of the rear setback on property located at 831 Sprague Street, Edmonds, Washington. The specific variance request is for a reduction from the required 15-foot rear setback to a 10- foot rear setback. (Staff report and Bowman testimony.) 2. Located on the subject property is the Applicant's residence. Also, there is an attached structure that the Applicant uses as a carport. It is the intent of the Applicant to remove the carport and to replace it with a new garage that will have dimensions as set forth in the site plan. This site plan was admitted as Exhibit 4 to the hearing and is attached hereto and by this reference is hereby incorporated as part of these findings. (Staff report and Exhibit 4.) 3. The subject property is zoned RS-6. Section 16.20.030 of the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) establishes rear setbacks for RS-6 zoned property as 15 feet. It is the request of the Applicant to reduce this standard to allow for a 10-foot setback. (Staff report and ECDC.) 4. The existing carport is nonconforming and in order to improve on the nonconforming structure the Applicant must seek a variance. (Bowman testimony.) 5. In order for a variance to be granted within the City of Edmonds the criteria as set forth in Section 20.85.010 of the ECDC must be satisfied. These criteria include: A. Because of special circumstances relating to the property, the strict enforcement of the zoning ordinance would deprive the owner of use rights and privileges permitted to other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning. B. The approval of the variance would not be a grant of special privilege to the property in comparison with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning. j Findings and Deci_,on of the Hearing Examiner of the City of Edmonds ` Re: V-12-86 Page 3; C. The approval of the variance will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Edmonds. D. The approval of the variance will be consistent with the purposes of the zoning ordinance and the zone district in which the property is located. E. The variance as approved or conditionally approved will not be significantly detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and same zone. F. The requested variance is the minimum necessary to allow the owner the rights enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning. (ECDC . ) 6. The Applicant desires to construct a deck on top of the carport. The owner of the property to the east of the subject property objected to the allowance of the improved carport and deck because of the potential invasion of privacy of her yard and the potential shading effect upon her yard. (Van Hoosen testimony.) 7. Parts of the wall and ceiling of the existing carport are rotting. It is the Applicant's intent to upgrade the carport by removing the entire existing structure and building a new one. The Applicant submitted that because of the rotting situation of the existing carport, special circumstances exist for the granting of a variance. (Perrnoud testimony.) 8. The Comprehensive Policy Plan Map designates the subject pro- perty as Low Density Residential. (Staff report.) 9. The proposed carport would be two feet wider and longer in dimensions than the existing carport. Further, the existing carport is 7 feet in height. It is the proposal of the Appli- cant to construct the new carport at a height of 10 feet. The deck would be constructed at a height of 10 feet also. 10. At the public hearing the Planning Department of the City of Edmonds withdrew the statement that the Staff did not oppose the variance request. Because of the potential intrusion of the deck on the privacy and shade on the adjoining property the Staff recommended denial of the variance. (Bowman testimony.) 11. In a letter submitted subsequent to the hearing the Applicant set forth a proposed compromise for the allowance of the requested variance. According to the Applicant, the variance Findings and Decis-on of the Hearing Examiner of the City of Edmonds Re: V-12-86 Page 4 should be granted subject to the following conditions: 1. The railing on the east side of the deck shall be solid, louvered, latticed strips, or of other privacy type design. 2. The location of the eastern railing shall be not less than 10 feet from the eastern property line in lieu of the current requirement of 5 feet. (Exhibit 7 . ) 12. Opposition to the carport and variance was submitted by Witness Van Hoosen. CONCLUSIONS 1. The application is for the approval of a variance for the reduction of the rear setback on property located at 831 Sprague Street, Edmonds, Washington. The requested variance is for a reduction of the required 15-foot rear setback to a 10-foot rear setback for the property which is located in an RS-6 zone. 2. In order for a variance to be granted within the City of Edmonds the criteria as set forth in Section 20.85.010 of ECDC must be satisfied. The application fails to satisfy all the criteria. 3. No special circumstances exist for the granting of a variance. The rotting of part of the existing carport, which is a noncon- forming structure, does not necessitate special circumstances. 4. The granting of a variance would be the grant of a special privilege to the Applicant. 5. The requested variance is in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan of the City.of Edmonds in that it is inconsistent with the goals as set forth in Section 15.20.005(B) of the ECDC. It is inconsistent in that it encroaches upon residential privacy which is classified as the most fundamental right to be upheld by the local government of the City of Edmonds. 6. The requested variance is contrary to the purposes of RS zoned property in that it does not prevent encroachment of the Appli- cant's property into other residences in the area. 7. The requested variance will create an impact to the adjoining properties and will intrude upon the adjoining property owner's privacy and sunlight. 8. The requested variance does not appear to represent the minimum variance request. a Findings and Decis.Lon of the Hearing Examiner of the City of Edmonds Re: V-12-86 Page 5 nRrTSTnM Based upon the preceding Findings of Fact and Conclusions; the testimony and evidence submitted at the public hearing; and, upon a site inspection by the Hearing Examiner it is hereby ordered that the requested variance for a reduction of the required rear setback from 15 feet to 10 feet,on property located at 831 Sprague Street, Edmonds, Washington, is denied. The reasons for denial are set forth in the findings and conclusions of this document. COMMENTS. The Applicant's intent to reconstruct the existing carport is admirable. However, the existing carport is a nonconforming structure. To claim that the existing structure is rotting and is in a dilapidated condition does not necessitate the granting of a variance. The purpose of the zoning standards is to have the structures within the zoning meet zoning standards. A structure that does not meet the zoning standards is considered a noncon- forming structure. To expand on a nonconforming structure, such as the improvement requested by the Applicant, increases the nonconformity. The intent of zoning is to remove the nonconform- ing, not expand on it. Accordingly, no special circumstances appear to exist and the variance is denied. 0 Entered this"&th day of June, 1986, pursuant to the authority granted the Hearing Examiner under Chapter 20.100 of the Community Development Code of the City of Edmonds. J M. DRTSCOLL ea ing Examiner NOTI OF RIGHT TO APPEAL Written appeals alleging specific error of fact or other grounds for appeal may be filed with the Planning Department, City of Edmonds, Civic Center, Edmonds, Washington, 98020, within fourteen days of the date of the Hearing Examiner's final action. In this matter any appeal must be received by the Department prior to 5:00 p.m. on June 2-1, 1986. Cdnt 0 t � CITY OF E D M O N O S LARR,'S NAUGHTEN 250 51h AVE. N. EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 98020 • (206) 771.3202 MAYOR COMMUNITY SERVICES PETER E. HAHN DIRECTOR DATE: May 23, 1986 TO: James Driscoll r 520 Pike Street Suite 1505 Seattle, WA 98101 TRANSMITTING: ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING V-12-86 - CHARLES PERRENOUD & CU-17-86 - WILLIAM BULCHIS AS YOU REQUESTED: FOR YOUR INFORMATION: XXX AS WE DISCUSSED: FOR APPROVAL: FOR YOUR FILE: XXX REVIEW AND COMMENT COMMENT AND RETURN: MINUTES OF 14EETING : REMARKS - PUBLIC WORKS PLANNING PLANNING DIVISION Susan Painter • P4nK .:i Ic=��,�E,� i;CiV EiNGINEERING 0 • i Charles E. Perrenoud 831 Sprague St. Edmonds, WA 98020 May 22,1986 City of Edmonds Hearing Examiner 205 5th Ave. North Edmonds, WA 98020 RE: File V-12-86 IMF CEN Ec MAY 2 2 1986 COMMUNITY SERVICES DIR. Dear Mr. Driscoll: Thankyou for providing us with the opportunity to submit additional comments regarding our request for a reduction of the rear setback from 15' to 10'. We were surprised when the published position of Edmonds' staff was reversed at the opening of our hearing and caught unprepared by the focus of Mrs. Van Hoosen's objection to the variance. This extra time has allowed us to develope a proposal which accommodates some of our neighbor's concerns. The variance is being requested so that our existing carport can be rebuilt as a garage of approximately the same length (see exhibit 4). The existing carport has over 22" in length, but without the variance we will have less than 18' in which to park a standard sized vehicle usually over 16' long. The American Institute of Architects Architectural Graphics Standards , sixth edition, pg. 47 recommends 21'-10" min. inside dimension of a one car garage. The roof and siding of the carport are rotten in some spots. I understand a permit cannot be obtained for work on the structure without bringing the location of the structure into conformance. We feel the circumstances created by the need for improvment and the existance of other similar non -conforming structures on nearby property warrant approval of the variance. At the time of the hearing I was unaware the development of the area within the variance was contingent upon the written description of the proposed use of that area. After reviewing the variance application I found no information requested beyond the horizontal dimension and location of the proposed structure. On the form "Declarations of. Applicant" item #1 (see exhibit 2) the use of the proposed structure is described as an enclosed carport, deck, and enclosed storage space. The letter and comments of our neighbor, Mrs. Yvonne Van Hoosen, seem to identify her concern with the proposed use of the structure (the roof deck) rather than with the variance allowing our structure closer to the alley. Given the fact that even without approval of the variance we would be allowed a roof deck as close as 5' from Mrs. Van Hoosen's property, we offer the following conditions to the proposed structure; 1) The railing on the east side of the deck shall be solid, louvered, latticed strips, or of other privacy type design. 2) The location of the eastern railing shall be not less than 10' from from the eastern property line in lieu of the current requirement of 5' In any event, we hope to work with Mrs. Van Hoosen and all our neighbors so that any changes we make on our property will be as compatible with thier needs as possible. We hope ,you agree the conditions to construction that we offer create a fair compromise between the concerned parties. We feel that the repairs and improvements outlined in our application will do more for increasing; the value of our neighborhood properties than the existing dilapidated carport and we hope you will give us this opportunity by approving the variance. Thankyou.for considering our request. Sincerely,; i -, VI I 0 t .'„ ... , l r' ,.. .. � , ... .. _.. ._,..�........_, _..,. ems...._ _ ,.a _.>... ._ . �...... *1� `.{.�'.,•�� '�,: EXHIBIT' 2 FILE# DATE CITY OF EDMONDS FEE �� c HEARING EXA111INER RE..CT �k � APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE APO'S l� HEARING DATE: APPLICANT A iic'e 6 Y' O`n ADDRESS_ /Op.3 SPr�qu� S� CITY & ZIP 3 S rG S , r m dnc�s yka PHONE_ 0 �' INDICATE TYPE OR DEGREE OF INTEREST IN PROPERTY cwyle'r LOCATION OR ADDRESS OF PROPERTY 0 0 S LC tL e LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY_ V�%C'St /& j l o y3 �-90u fti L of 4 icct- po N�-io n of U6�c cycled h © -i-hk 1`4oY eY�o % Ct ul VARIANCE REQUESTED: o Mre�4crc me Y�gutr rQ Seer �efb��� �i^olYl 0 N ooZ FOR OFFICE USE ONLY: USE ZONE: ZONING ORDINANCE REQUIREMENT: ZU, Release/Hold Harmless Agreement The undersigned applicant, his heirs and assigns, in consideration for the City processing the application agrees to release, indemnify, defend and hold the City of Edmonds harmless from any and all damages and/or claims for damages, including reasonable attorneys` fees, arising from any action or inaction is based in whole or in part upon false, misleading or incomplete information furnished by the applicant, his agents or employees. Permission to Enter Subject Property The undersigned applicant grants his, her or its permission for public officials and the staff of the City of Edmonds to enter. the subject property for the purpose of inspection and posting attendant to this application. Signature of Applicant, Uwner or Representative 3 DECLARIMON'S OF APPLICANT Please answer all questions 1. What are the physical characteristics, (i.e. topography, shape of lot, etc.) which create a hardship for you in regard to development of your property? I -I it „ w 7�, .,_ AJ-PI? 1 en e 2. H o dbes your propert difTer from other property 3. Will this variance be detrimental to the public or damaging to othe'r/ property or improvements in the vicinity? 4. What hardships will result to you if the variance is not granted? Will these hardships have been caused by your own action? n . /,,, A d n /1 /) 'i 5. Can you make reasonable use of your property without the variance? 0 _I-- rvTP��N ����2 Y tl�.e, fl .ei4�i., �...:�} i.R. t .;t 7"+ ';+ t 1 �.�:•t �.. '•tt'�id yl�ltE.fhsib1iJl'..:n3.•:'of `Ai F �.+' �np n ,.>, e i >,i.;�i�S.,tat :»i'eisStii��+l.k�4 :if ..eza.�:w,.�� e<��.-.:.e...�ut. , ..«..at.r..zw,�l,.a"#t«':.�.ad�..w.�:�,a.rea.�:oe✓ia.tr. - .s.,' - ... -,tober 12, 1986 We, the neighbors of Alice Thornton, who resides at 1003 Sprague Street, have no objection to her plans for the carport she described to us. We are aware that she has applied to the city of Edmonds for a variance for the carport. ..... .........Q................. ..l............ ...... .....�..... 2 .. ..`:....:.:�:�...�:�... �1..................... e / x!)'� ..................................................... . . .. C% � �����1; C . ..�: ...`f � �'C(�'//C-.�i �Z� ... ..:. �. �.C� .. �"LV �—C .• � l!l^'. 1-�L �L�- c.'zC� . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . f u �. •. • I`'y�•r � � _...._�.�.._—a..�.��..Y..�.�.��._ (}fix t �A t{t� t � , .±ix (T i a �41 y ! Y Y , Y � �Y + 1.;. .:.� �1..pj2 ��' `L"`": t ^. } µhnri� 5 S �'• �. —src . .. W.?t'a'a..J.: ..a, t .E .. su.v+, � p, r Q C4 1 41 11de� r .4 l lz� Vr Lei-lo*- I:oeLIN-V�7 ot-o"fle, �A,�eoe. ? fie 'Y I C (9 •Y,� i6-,4.e (k c �, �.04 cr it �,1 , i :�), �,t� •.lJ -��E-,ram i I l ! / - lG� •'/�� ��� �z L' �l s _iC,2 ' �L eALL. J. LC 22Gt ILduL ' LC CWL�c/;`u,Cc� lGC l (L�(} r r I I —le IOFJ G!d-VL) �LL�L-ire "r + LirM.s�aKirxGicri'" i. ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER LIST PLEASE LIST ALL STREET ADDRESSES OF RESIDENTS OF PROPERTY WITHIN 80 FEET OF THE PROPERTY LINES OF THE SITE. ALSO LIST NAMES AND MAILING ADDRESSES OF OWNERS OF THESE SAME PROPERTIES, (THIS INFORMATION MAY BE OBTAINED FROM THE COUNTY ASSESSOR'S OFFICE. IF A BANK IS LISTED AS OWNER, PLEASE INCLUDE LOAN NUMBER NEXT TO INDIVIDUAL'S NAME.) 957 Sprague St. 1007 Sprague St. 1019 Sprague St. 1004 Sprague St. empty lot — Owner is Nace (Next to 1004-Sprague) 1006 Daley St. 1010 Daley St. 1003 Daley St. 957 Sprague - Curtis, Chester B. 860 Alder St. Edmonds,Wa. 98020 1007 Sprague St. - Salmon, Gayle D. 20418 92nd Ave. W. Edmonds,Wa. 98020 1019 Sprague St. - Lomas & Nettleton Co. Millis, Alvin D . - 074.6-4.3547 P.O. Box 660722 Dallas, TX. 75266 1004 Sprague St. - Anderson, Harold A. 1101 2nd Ave. Seattle Wa. 98101 empty lot - Stephen Fern Nace 1204 N.W. Woodbine Way Seattle, Wa. 98177 1010 Daley - Conran, Mary Jane Box 217 1003 Daley - Reardon, Robert L. Edmonds, Wa. 98020 4.25 Pike St. Seattle Wa. 98101 1016 Daley - Ross, Fred K. P'.0. Box 1420 Portland, OR. 97207 Alice Thornton Gayle & Millicent Salmon 1003 Sprague Street 20418-92nd Avenue W. Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Wash. Mutual Say. Bank Resident/Owner Anderson, Harold A. 1007 Sprague St. #010080170258 Edmonds, WA 98020 1101 2nd Avenue Seattle, WA 9810.1 Harold Anderson/Resident Lomas & Nettleton Co. 1004 Sprague Street Millis, Alvin D. Edmonds, WA 98020 #0746-43547 P.O. Box 660722 Dallas., TX 75266 Stephen Fern Nace Alvin Millis/Resident 1204 N.W. Woodbine Way 1019 Sprague Street Seattle, WA 98177 Edmonds, WA 98020 Buford H. Stalker/Resident Wash. Federal S&L 958 Sprague Street Reardon, Robert L. Edmonds, WA 98020 #90-027-14891-6 425 Pike Street Seattle, W.A 9.8101 Robert & Shirley B'lackbourn Robert Reardon/Resident 958 Daley Street 1004 Daley Street Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Chester & Dolores Curtis Mary Jane Conran 860 Alder Street P.O. Box 217 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident/Owner Resident/Owner 957 Sprague Street 1010 Daley Street Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Commonwealth Western Mort. Fred Ross/Resident Ross, Fred K. #0922460 1016 Daley Street P.O. Box 1420 Edmonds, WA 98020 Portland, OR 9.7207 v , zq'Z LI yr � r Y � � G .� I � . � a ,.,a_r'Y. d .:r (�i...kl�.:... � (• ....v{t'wri. �:.ry,.a.. ew .. � �.ax...........a...�...,ua..�. _u.v. t...x ..�t;��.u.v.... .�vw ... .tl ^ � �^'i City of Edmonds INTER -OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE Bobby Mills - P.W. Gary `McComas Fire •Marshal Dan �&ith/Jerry Hauth - Engineering FROM Duane Bowman -Planning DATE 9/25/86 SUBJECT V-29-86 VARIANCE TOREDUCE STREET SETBACK -FROM REQUIRFD 20' TO 14' FOR CARPORT AT 1003 SPRAGUE STREET (.RS-6). HEARING DATE: OCTOBER 16, 1986. PLEASE'RESPOND WITH YOUR COMMENTS NO LATER THAN OCTOBER' 7, 1986. THANKS'. RECEIVED SEP 25 1986 EDMONDS FIRE DEPTr 7_b 130 ; V c Fri. p - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - REu E I V F .0 SEP 2 619.86 City of WHAM nos I: r S gOCINTER-OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE B o b0y:,'M i ' ll- P.,W. Gary McComas.- Fire Marshal Dan �(Tith*/Jerry Hauth - Engineering FROM Duane Bowman - Planning 9/25/86 DATE f aju� r Y �'r •t� M^M1 ���:' ukrT 1 wA •:.�..., .�.�,w,�klces"�f�.aK''r;..i:.s.,s.a.r . ......< < ... _ _ .s .... ,_. �,., .,a_. .. .,...-.a`».1.... .i._... .._ Cit Y of Edmonds t,Uu,jvEK► INTER -OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE Bobby Mills - P.W. Gary McComas..- Fire Marshal Dih/,Je,r. A,auth' - Engineering FROM Duane Bowman - Planning DATE 9/25/86 SUBJECT V-29-86 VARIANCE TO -REDUCE STREET SETBACK -FROM REQUIRED 20' TO 14' FOR CARPORT AT 1003 SPRAGUE STREET (RS-6). HEARING DATE: OCTOBER 16, 1986. PLEASE'RESPOND.WITH YOUR COMMENTS NO LATER THAN OCTOBER' 7 , 1986. THANKS'. Y 1 THE RFjwlt & 1ymwce WILL HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING w*rHV&jW CMMA 16p 19 ON THE FOLLOWING APPLICATION: FILE NO.Vo' W " S -woo �. •�i PROPERTY ADDRESS AND LOCATION Imo• t� ZONE DISTRICT THE HEARING WILL BEGIN AT ` s w M., IN THE PLAZA MEETING ROOM, LIBRARY BUILDING, 650 MAIN STREET, EDMONDS, WASHINGTON. IF YOU WISH TO COMMENT ON THIS PROPOSAL, YOU MAY COME TO THE HEARING AND SPEAK. YOU MAY ALSO WRITE A LETTER STATING YOUR VIEWS WHICH WILL BE CONSIDERED AT THE HEARING. PLEASE ADDRESS THE LETTER TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND INCLUDE THE ABOVE FILE NUMBER. IF THE ITEM IS CONTINUED TO ANOTHER HEARING BECAUSE THE AGENDA IS NOT COMPLETED, OR FURTHER INFORMATION IS NEEDED, THE DATE OF THE CONTINUED HEARING WILL BE ANNOUNCED ONLY AT THE MEETING. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION MAY BE OBTAINED AT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, 250 FIFTH AVENUE NORTH, EDMONDS (PHONE 771-3202, EXTENSION 252). THE REMOVAL, MUTILATION, DESTRUCTION, OR WAR NING. OFTHEHEARING S A NCEALMENT OF THIS PUNISHABLE BY FINE AND IMPRISONMENT. THIS NOTICE MAY BE REMOVED AFTER����� «e � ^^.+1„'ti ���#`��.,��.{_ "�. .... W.�»�s�S.��.•.ar"sf.,<, 9... t. �.�'.,�,... �.. •�f.us.�__w.,.. ,.,. ..�__. .. ...... .,„... ,i.: <_u _... ..:..u�,,. .. .... ........ ,._,.,,, _. .... ..... _ .... .. .,, ._,r _.., .. _... _... v.._�..._. STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss. COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH ) Leigh Francis FILE NO. APPLICANT AFFIDAVIT OF POSTER V-29-86 Alice Thornton being first duly sworn, on oath, deposes and says: That on the 3rd day of October 19 86 the attached Notice of Public Hearing was posted as prescribed by Ordinance, and in any event, in the Frances Anderson Center and Civic Center, and where applicable on or near the subject property. S i gn a d,�'�t/ Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of > > 19 V, Notary Public in and for the State of Washington. Residing at MY COMMISSION EXPIRES 6-16.89. f FILE NO. V-29-86 APPLICANTAlice Thornton AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ss. COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH ) Susan Painter being first duly sworn, on oath deposed and says: That on the 3rd day of October 19 86 the attached Notice of Public Hearing was mailed as required to adjacent property owners, the names of which were provided by the applicant. Signed &C")a ` �CZc2 2� Subscribed and sworn to before me this 044 day of CO 47�s 19_. Notary Public in and for the State of Washington. Residing at , MY CO IMM SSION EXPIRES 6.16-89. n ti THIS PACKET SENT TO HEARING EXAMINER .. ON OCTOBER 10,1986 EXHIBIT LIST V-29-86 EXHIBIT 1 - STAFF REPORT EXHIBIT 2 - APPLICATIOWDECLARATIONS EXHIBIT 3 - SITE PLAN EXHIBIT 4 - VICINITY MAP _ .. _. �._ _... if_St._...�.w.....• .l..i u.. {-l.w..l ». s. .„I �. .. _.v .... ....i � � ._ '... .. .,. ..... .... .. �_.» a.. ........ ,. _r...0 .�._.. 4 _ _.�_�.� •�'� � ' ';. dMi. EXHIBIT 1 STAFF REPORT TO THE BEARING EXAMINER FILE: V-29-86 HEARING DATE: October 16, 1986 I. REQUESTED ACTION: Variance to reduce the required 20' street setback to 14' to allow for the construction of a carport at 1003 Sprague Street, Edmonds. II. APPLICANT/OWNER: Alice Thornton 1003 Sprague Street Edmonds, WA 98020 III. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: See Exhibit 2 IV. STAFF FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: A. Description of the Subject Property and Surrounding Area The subject property is located on the northeast corner of the intersection of loth Ave. N. and Sprague Street. There is an existing residence located on the property, as shown in Exhibit 3. The lot contains 9,000 square feet. The Applicant desires to build a carport onto the southern side of the existing residence. Because the house is located too close to the Sprague right-of-way, a variance is needed. Surrounding development is entirely single family residential. B. Official Street Map R/W West - loth Ave. N. South - Sprague St. Proposed R/W 60' 60' Existing 60' 60' Staff Report V-29-86 C. Conformance to Chapter 20.85.010 1. Special Circumstances Page E Special circumstances do appear to exist in this particular case. The lot is a corner lot, with a grade separation and rockery along 10th Ave. N. Further, the logical place to construct a carport is in the location proposed by the applicant. 2. Special Privilege The proposed variance does not appear to represent a grant of special privilege. The two neighboring homes to the east appear to have similar street setbacks as that proposed by the applicant. 3. Comprehensive Plan The Comprehensive Policy Plan map designates the subject property and surrounding area as Low Density Residential. The proposed variance, does not appear to conflict with the purposes of the Comprehensive Plan. 4. Zoning Ordinance The subject property, as well as the surrounding area, is zoned RS-6. The proposed variance does not appear to conflict with the purposes of the zoning ordinance and the RS-6 zone district. 5. Not Detrimental The proposed variance does not appear to pose any significant impact to the public or to any near by private property or improvement. 6. Minimum Variance The requested variance does appear to represent a minimum variance request. V. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: It is the recommendation of the staff that V-29-86 be approved, in that it does conform to the review criteria of Chapter 20.85.10 n - �,� :G;..•" { #<�. : z ..z:,' . N . ."' { _,. w=s::+b+"a.:t.eLtc.S.�weirc,adun.,�..-yi�....,z..w...__..,...... .. �.... _ _ _...-.�... ........._ .. n ,...�.,...t.-�._...,,c�. �'+.u.x' '^'�r S„ F It } , AND ADDRESS BELOW IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS PLEASE PRINT YOUR NAME A ITEM AND/OR WISH TO RECEIVE A COPY OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S FINDINGS OF FACT V-29-86 ALICE THORNTON Variance to reduce the required street setback from 20' to 14' for a proposed carport addition at 1003 Sprague Street a) 0 ( S La -f' CITY OF EDMONDS DS r 250 51h AVE N. • EDMONDS. WASHINGTON 98020 • 12001 771 3202 ✓� HEARING EXAMINER FINDINGS AND DECISION OF THE, HEARING EXAMINER OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS IN THP' MA'.I"1'ER OF THE APPLICATION OLD ALICE THORNTON FOR APPROVAL OF A VARIANCE DECISION: The variance is granted subject to the conditions listed. INTRODUCTION LARRY S. NALIGHTLN Mh'(01i PII*,T,,: V-29--86 Alice Thornton, 1003 Sprague Street, Edmonds, Washington, 98020, and hereinafter .referred to as Applicant, has requested approval of a variance for a reduced street setback on property "located at 1003 Sprague Street, Edmonds, Washington, and more particularly described as: The West 1/2 of Lot 38 plus all of lots 39 and 40, Block 43, Together with the South 1/2 of that portion of vacated alley adjoining on the North which attached thereto by operation of law, in Snohomish County, State of Washington. A hearing on the request was held before the Hearing Examiner of the City of Edmonds, Washington, on October 1.6, 1986. At the hearing the following presented testimony and evidence: Duane Bowman Alice Thornton Planning Dept. 1003 Sprague St. City of Edmonds Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Anne Marie Langford 1016 Daley St. Edmonds, WA 98020 Buford Stalker 958 Sprague Edmonds, WA 98020 Dolores Curtis 860 Alder St. Edmonds, WA 98020 9s I 0 HEARING EXAMINEI. ,<E: 29-86 At the hearing the following exhibits were submitted and admitted as part of the official record of this proceeding: Exhibit 1 - Staff Report 2 - Application 3 - Site Plan " 4 - Vicinity Map 5 - Petition in Support of Application After due consideration of the evidence presented by the Appli- cant; evidence elicited during the public hearing; and, as a result of the personal inspection of the subject property and surrounding areas by the Hearing Examiner, the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions constitute the basis of,the decision of: the Hearing Examiner. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The application is for.• the approval of a variance to reduce the required 20-foot street setback. on property .located at 1003 Sprague Street, Edmonds, Washington. (Staff report.) 2. The subject property is zoned RS-6. Edmonds Com- munity Development Code (ECDC) 16.20.030 establishes the minimum street setback for RS-6 zoned property as 20 feet. The Applicant seeks a variance from this standard to allow a 14-foot setback in order to construct a carport on the subject property.; (Bowman testimony.) 3. The subject property is located on the northeast corner of the intersection of loth Avenue North and Sprague Street. Located on site is a residence that is approximately 35 years old. (Thornton testimony.) 4. It is the intent of the Applicant to build a carport on the side of the existing property. The Applicant has .requested a variance in - order to construct the same. 5. In order for a variance to be granted within the City of Edmonds the criteria as set forth in ECDC Section 20.85.010 must be satisfied. These criteria include: A. Because of special circumstances relating to the pro- perty, the strict enforcement of the zoning ordinance would deprive the owner of use rights and privileges permitted to other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning. B. The appoval of the variance would not be a grant of .special privilege to the property in comparison with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning. -2- i F.. HEARING EXAMINEI, RE: 29-86 C. The approval of the variance will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Edmonds. D. The approval of the variance will be consistent with► the purposes of the zoning ordinance and the zone district in which the property is located. E. The variance as approved or conditionally approved will not be significantly detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and same zone. F. The requested variance is the minimum necessary to allow the owner the rights enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning. (ECDC.) 6. The subject property is a corner lot. There is a severe grade separation on the west side of the property. The only logical place to construct a carport is in the location as proposed by the Applicant. (Bowman testimony.) 7. Other properties in the vicinity have similar street setbacks as proposed by the Applicant. The granting of the variance will not be the grant of a special privilege. (Staff report.) 8. The Comprehensive Policy Plan Map designates the subject property as Low Density Residential. (Staff report.) 9. The requested variance will not impact other property owners' views, nor impact other private properties or improvements in the vicinity. (Thornton testimony.) 10. The Planning Department of the City of Edmonds has recom- mended approval of the variance. 11. A witness (Curtis) testified to be -.n support of the variance for the carport, but requested that the structure be of a design similar to other structures in the vicinity. (Curtis testimony.) 12. A witness (Stalker,) testified to be in opposition to the variance. The witness submitted that the development of the carport would be detrimental to his property. Further, the witness submitted that the carport would be a detraction in the neighborhood and impact views. (Stalker testimony.) 13. A witness (Langford) questioned whether the carport would block any views. According to the Applicant, •the only view that would be blocked would be the view of her entrance from the property immediately south of her property. (Langford testimony.) L' -3- a 1. The application is Eor the approval of a variance to reduce the required street setback on property .located at 1003 Sprague Street, Edmonds, Washington. 2. The criteria for the granting of a variance as set forth in ECDC Section 20.85.010 have been reviewed. The application satisfies these criteria. 3. Because of the severe grade on the west end of the property and the rockery that is located on the western border of -the property, the only logical place to construct a carport is in the southern portion of the site. The grade and rockery do create special circumstances for the granting of a variance. 4. Other property owners have similar street setbacks to that as .requested by the Applicant. The granting of a variance will not be the grant of a special privilege to the Applicant. 5. The requested'variance does not conflict with the purposes of the Comprehensive Policy Plan of the City of Edmonds. 6. The requested variance is consistent with RS-6 zoning and the purposes of the zoning ordinances. 7. The requested variance will not be detrimental to other private properties in the vicinity. 8. The requested variance is the minimum variance request. t TT!IT C Tnm Based upon the preceding Findings of Fact and Conclusions; the testimony and evidence submitted at the public hearing; and, upon the impressions of the Hearing Examiner at a site view, it is hereby ordered that the requested variance for a reduced street setback on property located at 1003 Sprague Street, Edmonds, Washington, is granted subject to the following conditions: 1. The 20-foot street setback is reduced to a 14-Eoot street setback. 2. The Applicant must submit to the Planning Department the exact dimensions of the carport. I. The carport shall be limited to a one -car parking area. 4. The carport shall be of a design that is similar to an Arbor style or a greenhouse style. 5. The variance is for the addition of a carport. It is not for the construction of a garage. -4- 0 J ES M: DRISCOLL ,-i t�aring Examiner NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL Written appeals alleging specific error of fact or other grounds for appeal may be filed with the Planning Department, City of Edmonds, Civic Center, Edmonds,'Washington, 98020, within fourteen days of the date of the Hearing Examiner's final action. In this matter any appeal must be received by the Department prior to 5:00 p.m. on November 21, 1986. ^.-«•,,, r�S ,::.�,,,y,„A, wt3�.�-. tr:`v'. '+�' fti5,}yu.�`r�.:�,'3at4'ctw$:1151c� x3atrwn+'.`rs:ii s4tw?iafd.SYa?4warw+cvawirh:uw.ti..1i..S�n',i.l;.ii.ear..a ....,.......w.....z.....n ... J__.....15 ... ,. ,s. _.,..... w..,., ..k.. u,r_..,.,.,a% kL I V E D f�OV 1 1986 t CITY OF E D M O N D S LARRY S. NAUGHTEN CITY OF E�DMUNDS A HINGTON 98020 • (206) 7713202 .f . , N. EDMONDS, W S 1 ._. 250 5l h AVE. HEARING EXAMINER FINDINGS AND DECISION OF THE HEARING EXAMINER OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF FILE: V-29-86 ALICE THORNTON FOR APPROVAL OF A VARIANCE Because the mailing of the Findings and Decision of the Hearing Examiner of the City of Edmonds was delayed until November 10, 1986, the period of time allowed for appeal of the decision of the Hearing Examiner is extended to November 24, 1986, rather than November 21, 1986, as set forth in the decision. DATED this day of No r, 1986. 1 ,,,--�HEing•ExaminerL 9 EXHIBIT 2 ` k �-% FILES /'" 6'_S DATE Z r2/Ss-7 CITY OF EDMONDS FEE �Z�d HEARING EXAMINER RE CT �� (� � % APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE APO'S HEARING DATE: 31 ADDRESS 1� APPLICANT �/ KI f / i C%ter:'/ -.. c CITY & ZIP PHONE_ '27i INDICATE TYPE OR DEGREE OF INTEREST IN PROPERTY LOCATION OR ADDRESS OF PROPERTY V-U V �✓iV:�'-�T C! t'!; LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY / u /z i k j/J� ✓t n �- u f L A: r' 02 �'i5 ) 6, ('r`<Oi 2,' JL-N 4/2�,�.� VAR" IA14CE REQUESTED: %'l l= i l/lr,i/L `Ny'w- L`'�'�'�-yi: iyl//✓G S i�'uGTr/i� �= t^E"i r -G �i �w S%V►" ,c-Y ..S')= 7 81k' & i FOR OFFICE USE ONLY: USE ZONE: ZONING ORDINANCE REQUIREMENT: Release/Hold Harmless Agreement The undersigned applicant, his heirs and assigns, in consideration for the City processing the application agrees to release, indemnify, defend and hold the City of Edmonds harmless from any and all damages and/or claims for damages, including reasonable attorneys' fees, arising from any action or inaction is based in whole or in part upon false, misleading or incomplete information furnished by the applicant, his agents or employees. Permission to Enter Subject Property The undersigned applicant grants his, her or its permission for public officials and the staff of the City of Edmonds to enter the subject property for the purpose of inspection and posting attendan r this application. v� Signature of ,pli,,c nt, Owner or Representative 0 Staff does not oppose the approval of V-5-87. Should the Hearing Examiner grant the variance, it should be subject to the following conditions: 1. The height of the roof on the addition should be no higher than the existing house and garage. 2. The addition should be designed to match the existing residence. 3. Approval of the variance shall be only for the design submitted with the variance application. 4. Obtain Building Permits for all work done on the site. 0 Yiease answer aii que5LIU115 1. What are the physical characteristics, (i.e. topography, shape of lot, etc.) which create a hardship for you in regard to development of your property? 4 3. 4v111 LnlS VdI 1d11 LJC .fc 1.1 11I t-. --- -- other property or improvements in the vicinity? How does your property differ from other property in the same vicinity? 4. What hardships will result to you if the variance is not granted? Will these hardships have been caused by your own action? S. Can you make reasonable use of your property without the variance? 0 11.ti2,�� �� • l t�vc.� ✓`� � „� /��^•a�`'�'�-�r�1 /�G:�' — C�Gy�,� f =L rv� ►AJ (r: i�610� 21) 16 / �'v�7 k'r i Ij EXHIBIT 3 fu i s+ eta r Vic' 6 IC Jr��t Ll I: p 60 r, u t. dw I\1 rt UJ ��`C :�1 L���_.r�: :: CG t.i: i•C. ��Y�211� f, i� k I�� � J Co '� �0 �./. �O va 1 . f135U�-��c•l.� �53i,rJ P C) ............ J n u ,s,a -M•, '.. ",'•�.^:`� ,�Yv#1,S:e'1&^:1?'Y,;r.AW� xi�'eLT!. vs 34Yir`�\w.:,v K'.e s•.?.x%..4.w:-�r.L.:re.....lu,.ui l�I d. L I px� , err :-, r; im v Fr , i �V. 1 1` q i V CINITY"MAPS 15-87 w .., ar•, � ,�`. may, ,. , �Jt e `V O v -r. -47. 5O W qR� r� 60 ,n • 1 r•J O�f I ZLL64 7-A� A!£ T PLANT' LLL -- Q y h z DAYTON ST. p Zz on A 1,4032 ` "' 3RD AV S , 4.0.57 4 A coma 4 UNITS IZ zzz >p4 a q 059 zz 4 075 ue 4-p6C PLAN OF $ p/I4• p61 JASPER CF0N0 q 091 60 pz17 v 406Z Q �067 d1 bu W -o66z� Q 242 t. 9 EXHIBIT 5. i0 o3 v � 0�60�� : 4j Q A u I \ t• \t , ��\ 4�M Y J i �•t..;,y� d n rn� l�l DYI' t fYYVY YYJ�. +.�a.ay a. y if r� r:.M of Nit .J " Off t tj r K to it t`. to it t . , rip r \ i 7.n, y. •\ 1, ! n �� ,. �, :Z.•t HN�.a S'��y �t p�Y I,Fr\\', �TYr +1 •I rRi. i 10 If J r �r On my oath, I certify that the names and addresses provided represent all properties located within 80 feet of the subject property. Signature of Applican r A i nt's Representative Subscribed and sworn toore me thi ay of 19ci% . A Notary is in Yind foYC the State of Washington Residing at —Zz02� 1 ' agog.• ♦%11•.. • { • ` r���Uom •� i•i:r:..�.:,•:1 1 7 r '::.1f �•:::i: lea zL� • i ru .to :Li 10 me dead l E {.\a ' 1 4 , .% :':.ta r,;4 '.. r • 1 :::oil::' •\ b J ! Ia r ' ---.• .1 a.....0 1 t.Sy}�\�tlat goo �._, ..ffl.. l '1::1^ 1\ r 1 1, rl :; .•..'.:'•J.::J' r'! f, ore ;�,r 1 \ { , ri •:': L1.1 , . I. •i AI *to l111 ,�' 'd : :::•::.':': y i r_ iltl,.iit C; 1>11 a go ��1'I. t h. F •' 1 M r,•. { ll*M Wr ' ,?OPII .0\. IIJ ! :. 1 rmade. to r. - :': ::.:::::: i All of ,:AgoY.I• `; - /•'Pro oor I.y:; :..;; >.:.a ': , :•T ,� \• $ . .. or ri • t .y :7.:'....1.. :in: :fi �� .1•� �y"•Yi I•F a 1 ,.v .''i't \ • 11 -i . •• ' .�..::. J.. •:.\I t L do�+ "{ 'y. I r Illr r -a; ..;; ..roar:. 0. M • fa '. Y l 1 ti 1 Y -A r :: is •�.. V a 11",..Is `i: ty 1 . \ r �• t •r\I ' ::•:: • •%It I : ,fit: {i;,'• `' pry: S \ 1 \1. 4L%" yp :::,y a . r .:'•: j a , 7 a *I rr.. :: at..:: gA:.log.�• r ,i. :.t'. '.L: a .gala. 4tk:1' • X: 1•a \�or , go \I r' • 9 •\•ro to i• ' q 7i::w:::::: •{: J. 1rr ,Iti r"Ideas goa� aaaa9 0 \t• 3 a ., Sa K !:gaola:f i I tow.} :•i 1... '1 C.nJI I e. ..... is 1.so Trader �.1,.:1'.'1'i i.•. ,.::T y::.w..r.os, =rt::•.ir16 �Ole, C Job '';r,. r; `3 i ::or. to 11 t::{:' `.'1 Ito 0 "tI•rTl{t -t ril; jlJ;�\„ 1 fJ k °I; [I •• .40.011111.00.01 4. ':tip`•• + • . t ,rl..} r: ... ' lo-'.11. '�:: �1':. �+ ,j•; lY1 ,� ' S:i . L t:^::S: :.Y7::., T.1 A�a. 1 Ft f aaa a9 :.•;•••........ PJ((: 'la.;• r 7, r ': :its: " ;i., It' i; aI'#f: a ... ...... rl I..F.1 l�l �. I • V1 Y � �•:IL• •1•..f : Ago'lIll r �i�to .r. l:, :Y:::a ,lf a 1i :1! ; .riIl t .r Lr; ! . • t S _Jo ao: f.. •;,'iv: '1i \• • 11 • ,. R.r �• ; ,::r'•: •.�. a err t�nV\y'aa \ I � ' 01144.8,:� _:::A1 1- dead . 4 if 1 i' {of ' a l .Y.t , ` a •+ ; `ab\, :-»••• ; at"7op I ••I- a , It's a I a , 1 % 3Almost,. M.•; 8•'::.1 '\ r 1 'tov •[. rift r • J 1 Y....• ada..3 {5 u.tro/ .•Ja a \F r •\,rt { . • :. �•. • ur. •1\ \1 1 Ja..a1 I % .T.. •.r 16 . • r ,.Za\ta '5� #1 -ti 'Y1�\i3 i�,l'\ 1". , ♦ . .jd ••�1J. W.0({. If .':'.t '•n 4 1 �1i.:::::': , 1 '- 4v.,,I ,r•'::: 1 • 1 94.., �or I. • + 1 ••':I:•r• : ' ! 1\�1� il• '1 • 1 ti 1 5 �S, 1 ♦ 1 j+F ,.�11111 ":to a•r 1 a 1 ?4'raj.t �a J,1 V, is ..r; ! xa Itk f • 1 [/a11 rr µ . F f Ja • t z$ft.Jj. 1 to ! ; • •a ], ' nl 1 1 1dIJ 11 J1.�•M ♦ n i4: •'. •. '.1, •/ J 1 ,JI •{ \ Il a •'!�. ' •1• ' • ,•� 'agog y-t •ai•. PI .:1 ;.Y•..ua•\ f fllltoor f yu a• U - • ••.u••• F 1 logo 1 :1 \lt: ink ';` .;r. 1 ::r::I. 1.{::...•.. yl 4 + )% f•1�:1 v:igo't "::.min to 1 {.•. •desert .1 d'::. •i aa. ir: •:.::f• • :J ; .i; �{ F: v y.T. i... • ♦ .D,O.o IllJ i...to is oa '1•:%/: 0060 l.y :�•. .1 ;o J 1 _ . ..a ...r. .J :!•;logo\rta 1 . ' .4 + ::::a:r•r: + •::'•o.•"I (. /dark.•'� J F :_!•; I.. 11.,a' ..... }1 1 .v11:.}`• a�i..:.�1t• ' 1 :. •.� �.� x 3•:.�r. ... i 1.f.% good a::. .�. t met \, rFi x_•,.a l.,f'ry:.;.ai t y 'in a•.}K5 3•n a•a.:.l..:. .•.;::::.I:Aa .'3 , -.a 1'.'.: 111 i:....: y^ati NOr rl its , ]S , a; -d ::�•r:n 1 f i ..a �C••::•:.•. r '.:i.x IJa.y_ u \ r fv loss:: {(F :go • `al L9i P :': 1!7:u -1 rt': t'-.on n l�: 2� 'sllto, : 1•� ari:.1 s., '.0 ,• / j 1, r 4. 1 1 a \...V7[' �• r'y 1 f \Fi .., J q Is \ rl J". a • • i t :u.;'.. nor Li:./.♦ ff'i st V \11 :I :..: ew at `�, J 1 b Va •081,64910 S r g i 1 -a .\ .rut. We,, .•.• 'sF . 0 ago.•, '1 .*.; ••:.; a1',1�.' J f foot �1 1�4" •Is •:::A'' �' ".1•:•:::01 1good/ tPgot R.: i n t' : +::1. al [ i1i:. I� -.a •1 It \'I �ljn; :Ili 41408 f ���+; w• S �P� Ole.. .is s 'rf.' is 't , r !-`� •• :.1'1 4�,' gala•' 1 "r1 '1[•,\ Ji 1 log go% 'ot9,. �.3 �.+d ~ i 1 x 666. : •:11to .1.4('dyya i` ,' i' •e.: ,110111 - �r,::: .••�l::i•:t 1 :'.{ i\V1i• , dome G•: • Ya -61 F.�..'• - 61 •::.. •Pa� 'a.'.:at w.. L 6,00.4 6#1404 )-a1•: \-:':: 'w: c•� {. \ 11 =t,••: ;•(. •.9T a1 .l I. ol liI .'..:;a. i ((.;'.a.t {: s .a•' •'.allf.::1• nail �. iog I! 5 r . t •.\ !I`,. i 1... ... .ai la!1„.•1;-t Y •• 1• �lied �loaftoall.. 1 .n ,' .t1.i01 ':roil .a:.\'J�r'airP1%a IS �\ I orI�r;+fit �.7 ` CL 1.1" '_ , I , r• �toa a 1 I a.i ; �pedometers 1 701.• •1 Ia a F f 1•:1 11 tit 1 *a to : g a solo, Ago .` l' 1 ," i ai.:•:.:.:::t f •r . • ..{� b. . �_.;,�:::..rl '.� _ �. .',\,11f 11 r "u,r .,':1!!q'Y•t' �.Yso :•. to; , •• f .1 IYi.'.11. •.1 go S a , T. • • n �••,';I a i. . 'i.••A �y .1..;.\ ••� y,':.•:.::' . J. l ,r 1..� '1 No II6•.i.i: ! a',IsJ$••11$, . a 1 :': ' j:*vessels...I 1 .I bar :"a.' ..ou "e 4:7: tlg I `1\ L".K / a�:s at ��.1�' :4 3 yor :: a\.�3 '.''•.:'.r:a; ••'F,H ;:•: :� •:.'.. _� 3+1i:a,\t.1a 1•.a '�j tlf -- -- '3.:�..:�i I:,: J.o� R •:L. :•,.'y' : �•.. 1'•Imlow_w::Yi. -i J.,n :!.•t �l• �Tlv •.V •l,_ ¢-+CD po. O S aM Pon� CPolls 0 Zm W Polls CPool 1 0. Lit) Q Jgrogs3 [L�Q7 0.Oiy 3 Ul � 3 v CD 3 O Co) 3 -P C) 3 Ol J O Ql V% 30 O C J• O CD O f1 O 1 I-+ O 1:+ O N CD O N O N � N O NO O N'S � N i Ore m m n• rD c1 W -i 0. CD P n. C ''G ,1 C O ,1 � (n 0 • (n () O to O VI 0 N� N N O Vn N R� N N 17 1 .. O L'J ., x M o m to = CD CD 0) CD fD W �n nos ern• Ea �c+� nc+Its < �c*o i too conrD o" <� v< J v<` < Problem � v�0 v<� D<-1 \0 CD ;a t0 CD fD tp O 1p CD O \D CD c+ ID fD N t0 rD -' � CD `G 00 • CD CO . to O f) CO • n 00 � \ 00 � c CO = t G 00 � \ �• O 7C O 7 OC O� OC OCor Z�• ONZCL N NZ� NCD CD NCD N OO O� p• C0.D O• CD p p a CD O N O O � t" h N �. f�• ' (n 1 ro 0 4' rD T City of Edmonds Gary McComas = = Fire M. INTER -OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE Bobby Mills -.PW. ban Smith/Jerry Hauth Eng. TO FROM Duane Bowman DATE 2/4/87 SUBJECT V 5-87 VARIANCE TO REDUCE. REQUIRED STREET SETBACK ALONG BELL STREET FROM CODE REQUIRED 20' TO 9' FOR RESIDENCE AT 204 SUNSET AVE. (.RS-6) HEARING DATE: MARCH 5, 1987 PLEASE RESPOND WITH YOUR COMMENTS NO LATER THAN FEBRUARY 23, 1987. THANKS. itEC i VrD FEB 0 51887 EDMONDS FIRE DEP.L "^-'�,eL-SSaci.,.isq Zr .,1 ri ,_,.:e,y.<w.............�._.. .-...._._..s....,..+..... ... ... .. _..�.. .,...._.,.., .,,...., . ..R .., ._. ..,... .,.,. ,... .. ...m ..,.._... u...... ...—....r.,.a- %EDEI.V_ED OF, EDMONDS1 FE 5 1981 C►T_y City of Edmonds PUBLIC WORKS `teary McComas = Fir: INTER -OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE Bobby:Mi11 -' P:W: . tDan Smith/Jerry Hauth - Eng. Duane Bowman 2/4/87 To FROM DATE SUBJECT 43i f`� t[" It t ` t ';b V 5 87 ..'. VARIANCE TO REDUCE.` REQUIRED STREET SETBACK ALONG BELL STREET FROM CODE REQUIRED 20' TO 9' FOR RESIDENCE AT 204 SUNSET AVE. (.RS-6) HEARING DATE: MARCH 5, 1987 PLEASE RESPOND WITH YOUR COMMENTS NO LATER THAN FEBRUARY 23, 1987. THANKS. A j -r I ...w....., v.a.,1._.........L.-... �. _..��..._+u::uN��..«a.Jl::� '•t....»f.::.il. ....1.. .....u�..�+. i�ra.w.a u..........W. Y,w.r..�.v...._...u....a l•L .....4..+ru�-.v.-'.i.aavew :a..•1 .. ..� .� .... Cltyof Edmonds Gary'.Mcco, mas Fire M. INTER -OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE Bobby ;Mi11s - P.'W. Dan Smith/Jerry Hauth Eng. TO FROM Duane Bowman SUBJECT —_ DATE 7 /d /Q7 ��r7a 'V-5-87 VARIANCE TO REDUCE REQUIRED STREET SETBACK ALONG BELL STREET FROM CODE REQUIRED 20' TO 9' FOR RESIDENCE AT 204 SUNSET AVE. (RS-6) HEARING DATE: MARCH 5, 1987 PLEASE RESPOND WITH YOUR COMMENTS NO LATER THAN FEBRUARY 23, 1987. THANKS. HAANKS. n f I r _ _ CITY OF EDMONDS NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING PROPERTY ADDRESS AND LOCATIO as ZONE DISTRICT 1 jVGF%w WILL HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING 5-19 11 1--, ON THE FOLLOWING APPLICATION: 1 THE HEARING WILL BEGIN AT �M., IN THE PLAZA MEETING ROOM, LIBRARY BUILDING, 650 MAIN STREET, EDMONDS, WASHINGTON. IF YOU WISH TO COMMENT ON THIS PROPOSAL, YOU MAY COME TO THE HEARING AND SPEAK. YOU MAY ALSO WRITE A LETTER STATING YOUR VIEWS WHICH WILL BE CONSIDERED AT THE HEARING. PLEASE ADDRESS THE LETTER TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND INCLUDE THE ABOVE FILE NUMBER. IF THE ITEM IS CONTINUED TO ANOTHER HEARING BECAUSE THE AGENDA IS NOT COMPLETED, OR FURTHER INFORMATION IS NEEDED, THE DATE OF THE CONTINUED HEARING WILL BE ANNOUNCED ONLY AT THE MEETING. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION MAY BE OBTAINED AT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, 250 FIFTH AVENUE NORTH, EDMONDS (PHONE 771-3202, EXTENSION 252). THE REMOVAL, MUTILATION, DESTRUCTION, OR CONCES NOTICE BEFORE THE DATE ARNING ! OF THE AH HEARING A LMENT OF IMISDEMEANOR PUNISHABLE BY FINE AND IMPRISONMENT. THIS NOTICE MAY BE REMOVED AFTER I t�ff Yc6ml a w\o-,A� Zl��,P 7 FILE NO. V - 5 - 8 7 ( J° APPLICANT Marie Jolly . AFFIDAVIT OF POSTER STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ss. COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH ) Duane Bowman being first duly sworn, on oath, deposes and says: That on the 23rd day of February � lg 87 ,'the attached Notice of Public Hearing was posted as prescribed by Ordinance, and in any event, in the Frances Anderson Center and Civic Center, and where applicable on or near the subject property. Signed Subscribed and sworn to before me this ,,-2_3 A,� day of���.. 19_0. Notary Public in and for the tit,ate or Washington. Residing at C MMISSION EXPIRES'6.16.89. I FILE NO. V - 5 - 8 7 APPLICANT Marie Jolly AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ss. COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH ) Susan Painter being first duly sworn, on oath deposes and says: That on the 2 3 r d day of February ,19 87 the attached Notice of Public Hearing was mailed as required to adjacent property owners, the names of which were provided by the applicant. Signed 14a-r— Pat. Subscribed and sworn to before me this ✓. - day of 19�. Notary Public in and for the State of Washington. Residing at MY CO MISSION EXPIRES 811649. 8 I t EXHIBIT 1 STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER FILE: V-5-87 HEARING DATE: March 5, 1987 I. REQUESTED ACTION: Variance to reduce the required 20' street setback to 9' along Bell Street to allow an addition onto the existing residence at 204 Bell Street, Edmonds. II. APPLICANT/OWNER: Marie Jolly 204 Sunset Avenue Edmonds, WA 98020 III. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: See Exhibit 2 IV. STAFF FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: A. Description of the Subject Property and Surrounding Area The subject property is located on the northeast corner of the intersection of Bell Street and Sunset Avenue. The lot contains approximately 7,200 sq. ft. of area. There is an existing older home located on the property. A detached two car garage is located east of the hone, with access off the alley to the east of the property. The Applicant is seeking a variance to reduce the required 20' street setback from Bell Street to allow an addition onto the rear of the existing residence. Surrounding development is entirely single family residential. B. Official Street Map West - Sunset Avenue W East - Alley South - Bell Street C. Conformance to Chapter 20.85.010 16' ME Existing 60' 16' 60' 0 1. Special Circumstances The existing residence was constructed nine feet from Bell Street. In order to do the addition, a variance is needed. The subject lot is a corner lot. Other than that, no unique circumstances exist. 2. Special Privilege The proposed variance does not appear to represent a grant of special privilege. Other homes in the area have similar setbacks. 3. Comprehensive Plan The Comprehensive Policy Plan map designates the subject property as Low Density Residential, as are the adjacent properties. The proposed variance does not appear to conflict with the purposes of the Comprehensive Plan. 4. Zoning Ordinance The subject property, as well as the surrounding properties to the north and south, is zoned RS-6. To the east is RM zoning zoning. The proposed variance does not appear to conflict with the purposes of the zoning ordinance or the RS-6 zone district. 5. Not Detrimental If conditioned, the proposed variance does not appear to pose any significant impact to the public or to any near by private property or improvement. 6. Minimum Variance The requested variance does not appear to represent a minimum variance request. V . STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The proposed variance presents a typical case of a hone owner of a nonconforming residence attempting to improve his home and being thwarted by the limitation of the amount of improvements as set forth in Chapter 17.40 of the ECDC. The only way to around this is to seek a variance. Unfortunately in this particular case, it does not appear that all the variance criteria can be met. 0 g3lz.?..91!5 1D4 - a(-o Mk9j nIC) Qz-i,2: 1091v1 WIT C m,,m !.1 q1,VT �10 <o-)10- eve sc s1mvvo3 °ni 1�'d f SCINOW43 �0:�i( 1 MEMORANDUM as March 13, 1987 TO: James M. Driscoll Hearing Examiner FROM: Duane V. Bowman Assistant City Planner -5-87 SUBJECT: Response to Exhibit 9 Roof Pitch #V I reviewed the letter from Ron Johnson,representing the Jolly's, regarding the roof pitch on their residence. In Mr. Johnson's letter, he explains that the existing roof pitch has a slope of 3" in 12". He also states that the Uniform Building Code, 1985 edition, allows shake roofs on such a slope with the approval of the Biulding Official. I spoke with Hal Reeves, Mr. Johnson'scial, who letter. Ao3" confirmed the pitched information contained in Mr. royal of the Building Official. Mr. roof may have shakes with the approval Reeves indicated that he would advise property ownerainst such , allow sto place would, with a written request f p shakes on such a roof. regarding this matter, please call me If you have any further questions at 771-3202, ext. 254. PLEAS[ PRINT YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS BELOW IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM AND/OR WISH TO RECEIVE A DOPY OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S FINoznsu OF FACT y-6-87 MARIE JOLLY Variance to reduce the required street setback from 28' to 0' to allow an addition to the residence at 204 Sunset Avenue. —— ADDRESS ' 12/c. " [/- | 'K J v ` ''.' CITY OF EDMONDS 250 5th AVE. N. • EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 98020 • (206) 771.3202 HEARING EXAMINER FINDINGS AND DECISION OF THE HEARING EXAMINER OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS LARRY S. NAUGHTEN K L V t I VNEOD CITY OF, EDMOND.S, IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF FILE: V-5-87 MAR7:E JOLLY FOR APPROVAL OF A VARIANCE DECISION: The variance is denied. INTRODUCTION Marie Jolly, 204 Sunset Avenue, Edmonds, Washington, 98020, (hereinafter referred to as Applicant) has requested approval of a variance for the reduction of the setback on Bell Street. The requested variance is for a reduction of the required 20-foot street setback to a 9-foot street setback and is sought for the purpose of building an addition to an existing residence on the subject property. A hearing on the request was held before the Hearing Examiner of. the City of Edmonds, Washington, on March 5, 1987. At the hearing the following presented testimony and evidence: Duane Bowman Victor Schoch Planning Dept. 135 - 2nd Ave. No.. City of Edmonds Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Ralph Larrabee Marion Larrabee 200 - 2nd Ave. No. #102 - 0 - 2nd Ave. No. ?I102 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, `nlA 98020 Marie Jolly 204 Sunset Avenue Edmonds, WA 98020 At the hearing the following exhibits were submitted elrie.i as part of the official record of this proceeding. Exhibit 1 - Staff Report 2 - Application/Declarations 3 - 'Plot P1a" 4 - Building Elevations -1- HEARING EXAMINER RE: Exhibit 5 To 6 It 7 8 9 V-5-87 - Vicinity Map - Photographs - Halbert Letter - Petition of Schoch and Others - Letter from Ronald Johnson If 10 - Re: Roof Pitches Response of the City to Johnson Letter After due consideration of the evidence presented by the Applicant; evidence elicited during the public hearing; and, as a result of the personal inspection of the subject property and surrounding areas by the Hearing Examiner, the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions constitute the basis of the decision of the Hearing Examiner. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Applicant has requested approval of a variance for the reduction of the street setback at 204 Sunset Avenue, Edmonds, Washington. It is the intent of the Applicant to reduce the street setback for the subject property that fronts Bell Street. The required street setback is 20 feet and the Applicant desires to reduce the setback to 9 feet. (Staff report.) 2. The subject property is located on the northeast corner of the intersection of Bell Street and Sunset Avenue in the City of Edmonds, Washington. It is a 7,200 square foot lot on which there is an existing residence. The existing residence is nonconforming in that it is constructed within 9 feet of Bell Street and does not adhere to the street setback standards of the City of Edmonds. The residence was constructed prior to the zoning being established for the subject property. (Bowman testimony.) 3. The subject property is zoned RS-6. (Staff report.) 4. The Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) 16.20.030 establishes the minimum street setback for RS-6 zones as 20 feet. The Applicant seeks a variance to allow a setback of 9 feet in order to construct an addition to the nonconforming structure on site. (Staff report, Bowman testimony and ECDC.) 5. In order for a variance to be granted within the City of Edmonds the criteria as set forth in ECDC 20.85.010 must be satisfied. These criteria include: A. Because of special, circumstances relating to the property, the strict enforcement of the zoning ordinance would deprive the owner of use rights and privileges permitted to other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning. B. The approval of the variance would not be a grant of special privilege to the property in comparison with the -2- HEARING EXAMINER RE: J-5-87 limitations upon other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning. C. The approval of the variance will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Edmonds. D. The approval of the variance will be consistent with the purposes of the zoning ordinance and the zone district in which the property is located. E. The variance as approved or conditionally approved will not be significantly detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and same zone. F. The requested variance is the minimum necessary to allow the owner the rights enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning. (ECDC.) 6. The subject property is a corner lot. It is the intent of the Applicant to upgrade the house on the lot by enclosing a porch and making an addition on the east side of the existing residence. Because of the nonconforming status of the structure, the Applicant is limited to the amount of improvements that can be made on a yearly basis. (ECDC Chapter 17.40 and Jolly testimony.) 7. The Applicant testified that the existing residence is .assessed at $43,000 and that according to ECDC 17.40 she could make improvements over a three-year period. However, she indicated that such improvements would be disruptive to the neighborhood and would serve no legitimate purpose. (Jolly testimony.) 8. If the variance is granted the size of the setback from the residence to Bell Street will not be decreased. The existing structure is 9 feet from Bell Street and only a small portion of the proposed addition will be 9 feet from Bell Street. The remainder of the addition will be a significant distance from Bell Street. (Exhibit 3.) 9. The subject property is a corner lot. As a result, it has two street setbacks but no rear setback. (ECDC 16.20.040.) A corner lot is not a special circumstance criterion for variances. (ECDC 20.85.010.) 10. Other properties,in the area have setbacks of similar size. However,. all variances must be judged on the merit of each individual case. (Administrative Finding.) Isis 0 HEARING EXAMINER RE: '-5-87 11. The Comprehensive Policy Plan designates the subject property as Low Density Residential. (Staff report.) 12. The requested variance would not pose a significant impact to the public nor to nearby private properties or improvements. The proposed addition would be an improvement to the structure and would not impact views in the neighborhood. (Jolly testimony and Staff report.) 13. The Planning Department of the City of Edmonds has recommended the following: "The proposed variance presents a typical case of a home owner of a nonconforming residence attempting to improve his home and being thwarted by the limitation of the amount of improvements as set forth in Chapter 17.40 of the ECDC. The only way around this is to seek a variance. Unfortunately in this particular case, it does not appear that all the variance criteria can be met. "Staff does not oppose the approval of V-5-87. Should the Hearing Examiner grant the variance, it should be subject to the following conditions: "l. The height of the roof on the addition should be no higher than the existing house and garage. 112. The addition should be designed to match the existing residence. "3. Approval of the variance shall be only for the design submitted with the variance application. "4. Obtain Building Permits for all work done on the site." (Staff report.) 14. The Applicant submitted that recommended Condition Number l is prohibitive because a shake roof would not be able to be used on the new addition. According to the Applicant's representative, the Uniform Building Code, Section 3203(h) recommends the roof pitch of 4:12, but the roofs with wood shakes must be installed on a slope not less than 3:12. The Applicant's representative submitted that they would not recommend using wood shakes on a roof that was less than 4:12 pitch. (Exhibit 9.) 15. The existing roof pitch of the Applicant's residence is a slope of 3" in 12". The City submitted that it would approve shakes with the approval of a Building Official for a 3" in 12" pitched roof, but would advise against such a request. (Exhibit 10.) -4- r. HEARING EXAMINER RE: V-5-87• 16. Witnesses objected to the issuance of the variance on the grounds that the roofline of the addition will cut off views east of the subject property. With the reduction of views, according to witnesses, the values of properties, especially condominiums east of the site, will be depreciated. (Schoch and Larrabee testimonies. CONCLUSIONS 1. The application is for the approval of a reduction of street setbacks on property located at 204 Sunset Avenue, Edmonds, Washington. The requested street setback reduction is from the required 20-foot setback to a 9-foot setback along Bell Street. The subject property is a corner lot at the intersection of Bell Street and Sunset Avenue, Edmonds, Washington. 2. In order for a variance to be granted within the City of Edmonds the criteria as set forth in ECDC 20.85.010 must be satisfied. The Applicant has failed to satisfy one of the criterion, special circumstances relating to the property. 3. The granting of a variance would not be the grant of a special privilege to the Applicant. The property would be improved and, because of its location in a highly visible portion of town, it would improve the aesthetic value of the City. 4. The requested variance is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Edmonds in that it is a high -quality residential unit which harmonizes with the surrounding areas, adds to the community identity and protects the neighborhood from incompatible additions. Further, it is the retention and rehabilitation of an older house in the neighborhood that would be beneficial to the City. 5. The requested variance is consistent with the purposes of the RS-6 zoning in that it regulates areas primarily for family living in single-family dwellings, it complements and is compatible with other single-family dwelling units in the area. 6. The requested variance would not be detrimental to other proper- ties in the area. It does not appear that the proposed addition would impact views. 7. The requested variance is the minimum variance request. 8. No special circumstances exist for the granting of a variance. More specifically, none of the circumstances as set forth in ECDC 20.85.010(A)(1) exist in this case. 9. The Planning Department's recommendation is set forth in Finding #13. -5- 0 HEARING EXAMINER RE: V-5-87 DECISION Based upon the preceding Findings of Fact and Conclusions; the testimony and evidence submitted at the public hearing; and, upon the impressions of the Hearing Examiner at a site view, it is hereby ordered that the requested variance for a.reduction of a street setback from 20 feet to 9 feet along Bell Street for the property that is located at 204 Sunset Avenue is denied. COMMENTS This variance has been denied because the Applicant is unable to satisfy all the criteria for the granting of a variance as set forth in ECDC 20.85.010. No variance may be approved in the City of Edmonds unless all of the criteria of ECDC 20.85.010 can be satisfied. This was a very difficult decision to make. From the testimony submitted and from the exhibits presented it is apparent that the proposal of the Applicant is a well -designed and reasonable addition to the residence that exists at 204 Sunset Avenue, Edmonds, Washington. The addition would upgrade the existing residence on site and would be beneficial to the neighborhood. However, upon a review of the testimony presented at the public hearing and all the exhibits submitted in the public record, it is impossible to determine what special circumstances exist for the subject property that warrant the grant of a variance. As noted in the City's recommendation,•the Applicant is limited for the improvement of the residence because of the provisions of ECDC 17.40 et seq. Because the residence is a nonconforming structure the cost in any one-year period of maintaining or altering allowed by this subsection may not be more than 25 percent of the fair market value of the nonconforming building. Thus, without the variance, the Applicant is restricted to making the improvements on a piecemeal basis over three years. This is a difficult process and does not appear to be beneficial to the City of Edmonds, but it is the requirement of ECDC Chapter 17.40. Further, with the restrictive criteria of ECDC 20.85.010 for variances, the Applicant appears to be limited. Entered this 27th day of March, 1987, pursuant to the authority granted the Hearing Examiner under Chapter 20.100 of the Community Development Code of the City of Edmonds. ES M. DRISCOLL ring Examiner aM. J `Kri +Yla �.11 HEARING EXAMINER RE: V-5-87 NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL Written appeals alleging specific error of fact or other grounds for appeal may be filed with the Planning Department, City of Edmonds, Civic Center, Edmonds, Washington, 98020, within fourteen days of the date of the Hearing Examiner's final action. In this matter any appeal must be received by the Department prior to 5:00 p.m. on April 9, 1987. i -7- 0 ! .:. am 0 EXHIBIT'2 APPLICANT CITY & ZIP CITY OF EDMONDS HEARING EXAMINER APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE DATE FEE ye RECT --7738 APO'S 1% GG o HEARING DATE: d -I O ADDRESS Ay —&ZHONE_ INDICATE TYPE OR DEGREE OF INTEREST IN PROPERTY LOCATION OR ADDRESS OF PROPERTY LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY_ • VARIANCE REQUESTED: FOR OFFICE USE ONLY: USE ZONE: ZONING ORDINANCE REQUIREMENT: 10 irj�;6k OAI i OA0e-v , rj[ Release/Hold Harmless Agreement The undersigned applicant, his heirs and assigns, in consideration for. the City processing the application agrees to release, indemnify, defend and hold the City of Edmonds harmless from any and all damages and/or claims for damages, including reasonable attorneys' fees, arising from any action or inaction is based in whole or in part upon false, misleading or incomplete information furnished by the applicant, his agents or employees. Permission to Enter Subject Property The undersigned applicant grants his, her or its permission for public officials and the staff. ofthe City of Edmonds.to"­en er the ject raperty for the purpose of inspection and posting attendan to s a�pli ion. ,nature of Appl ' t",- Owner or R.epr_ esentative 9 Please answer all questions 1. What are the physical characteristics, (i.e. topography, shape of lot, etch) which create a hardship for you in regard to development;:of your property? 2. How does your property fi?Eeo'r4"'f6rom oth property in the same vicinity? 3. Will this variance be detrimental to the public or damaging to other property or improvements in the vicinity? 09- - �'4-t a �V, 4. ®What hardships will result to you if the variance is not granted? ®Will these hardships have been caused by your own action? S. Can you ma r . arG reasonable use of your property without the variance. LI S Yi Y �+Cr fL ti �'� 1 x . 3 'x.t-�.e4ts�rL;LGi..r :ah►»wrmsv:.a,..ss..,vW... _ _.. _ �._.. ,... ... . _,��._ _. ,,.,, � r` i� :}t 1 BIT 3 5 4 k t;V.I'C 1.I.TY MAP aP Common Area 6 O 4 l V 31- 8 7;' 7 J RPL T. BROOKAcRES 4' �• ID ESTATES (69- . 36 4 Common Area r�U Q\i 37 J=� Tr. /3 "1 5 38 K. Q 6 39 / it HA IN S 3 40 6 7 N 2 00 (75 (� (` 42 1 1�o Tr 999 1-014 EL Q 1 s W. cu, Gov't. Lot t / N.W. Cor.Gov t. Lot 2 1-064 I-015 1 1-009 1-019 C. i c � \ \ , 6 !.: 1-042 P r p\r y ;-0�7 sp ?-045\ o I 1-004 ,o. J \ \ \ ►-ors \ sir s P / I 1-024 y\ \\ �o�\n1-041 s 1- / J See S. E. //4 for i \ \ �� \\ \ \ ,, N plat of T�1 Bor \ 1-025 Qy� \ 1- �' \ �; L y\! 2 PARK. 4E\ 3 E R7.r-o 0 stand _ l ^ -� • _ u..-._...._..u/ arrL_.uuu.a".It ntA.rJLVI..W .•v._i .v_ lw ••v, j ,, �.. I r '• i 4 i It lot, / r 1 rr EXH.I'B1T4 4 l r IL I IAd ��. } „ r' Ist a I- A. s. .. ._ f 1 r 7 a fi' Is It „x{ ? `1 9Is •� �., I'• t •i • i 11 ,%.• it I Its --�"�ti;, r Is i; lZir�x LA1 # � r.. t Is i 4 old t 1' — u I1 I 4�,(� it '� .r `... \ �� �•�, ��! tl i It sold Is F�r i.. 1 Ili a .1 I•.It 0I r "soIt 0 .. `, r E < } •_ F It 1.q rl .•'� t l iu. ,r �;jn �•' tr ;'.t,.. r ,1S"r.: �; �VI,. •.,'�I •;,,' y �,.i rt SLTLiF��C!, 1^ ',r•4II'I�SI It t 1... t �.� 72.E .. !; It r i_'r .. Is 4 . OTHER \I 4 P. HClC.t i"i ?ac�__t. It {; '{;� �ta;t;c.; DFF i. add .,—, Otm If 1�t A N© T- 4.( r 09 It It It it sks „r t Is 114 kk 1 iIxin 4 I. Its 4 J Kr Ao I /l i J City Of Edmonds' Gary M. - Fire M. INTER -OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE Bobby hi. - PW Dan•�i:Sini th/Jerry--Hauth - Engineering TO _. SUBJECT V-31-87 RECEIVED N nV % �98� ENGINEERING FROM Duane Bowman _ DATE Oct. 30, 1987 Variance to build on the property line located at 17015 Talbot Rd. (We have not yet received a copy of the legal description). HEARING DATE: NOVEMBER 19, 1987 Please respond with your comments no later than November 10, 1987. Thank you. 0 City of Edmonds Gary M, - Fire M. CINTER-OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE Bobby,'M Dan Smith/Jerry Hauth - Engineering Duane Bowman TO FROM — ----- SUBJECT --- ----- .-__ DATE r �FPr nct. 30. 1987 V-31-87 Variance to build on the property line located at 17015 Talbot Rd. (We have not yet received a copy of the legal description). HEARING DATE: NOVEMBER 19, 1987 Please respond with your comments no later than November 10, 1987. Thank you. �� C dZS P C' /[ P r /C" /0-7Y / / ' / • / / T .� ^ ��/ 0 City of Edmonds 1 10V � 19898 7 INTER -OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE -,, ., , DEbr ~Gary�MKr Fire,M, - Bobby 'fit. PW Dan Smith/Jerry Hauth - Engineering TO SUBJECT FROM _ Duane Bowman DATE nr.t . 30. 1987 V-31-87 Variance to build on the property line located at 17015 Talbot Rd. (We have not yet received a copy of the legal description). HEARING DATE: NOVEMBER 19, 1987 Please respond with your comments no later than November 10, 1987. Thank you. .,p to & . >O ,RECEIVED jv C7 0,�� ►� c N� � (!J �� NOV 21987 F,DMONDS FIRE DEFT. r:; 0 i ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 9/ S` y0--2 L7 S`O mowot 71z eh,00 e Wet ,.) �w&fscade 0137(t'y_ate- /� On my oath, I certify that the names and addresses provided represent all properties located wi" in 80 feet of the subject property. A 1' nt`" cant's RepresenzaL,vC d e sworn o me th �, day of `Q�-!=' '`�'� Subscribed N tary Public in and for the State of Washingto Residing ats n MY COMMISSION EXPIRES 6.16:89- I Richard Krause 17015 Talbot Rd. Edmonds, WA 98020 Olympic Savings & Loan Sullivan, T 2915402950 P.O. Box 1950 Seattle, WA 98020 Donald Thorlakson,lResident 17003 Talbot Road Edmonds, WA 98020 Kenneth Stea.n/Resident 7707 171st Pl SW Edmonds,*WA 98020 William Anderson/Resident 7711 171 st ST SW Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident 17030 Talbot Rd. Edmonds, WA 98020 1 7 Ph.il & Diane Tieggs 16911 Talbot Rd. Edmonds, WA 98020 Leo & Charlene Ray 120 North Tullock Snohomish, WA 98290 Cascade*Savings & Loan Anderson, W 52003093 2828 Colby Everett, WA 98201 Thomas Sullivan/Resident 17041 Talbot Rd. Edmonds, WA 9&' . Resident 17020 Talbot Rd. Edmonds, WA 98020 I .. •�•,. � �., .,e:�t.. ,� .a:..., �: �� }, t �.i f: t j: �� i.. h b; �q r. ,: r' 1 �" i if i � �.t� � � i�, a'.: , THE A KAMM& WILL HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING p Vo 1 19427 _, ON THE FOLLOWING APPLICATION: FILE NO. o aOP7 PROPERTY ADDRESS AND LOCATION _ At Jax — ZONE DISTRICT, THE HEARING WILL BEGIN AT ° o.M., IN THE PLAZA MEETING ROOM, LIBRARY BUILDING, 650 MAIN STREET, EDMONDS, WASHINGTON. IF YOU WISH TO COMMENT ON THIS PROPOSAL, YOU MAY COME TO THE HEARING AND SPEAK. YOU MAY ALSO WRITE A LETTER STATING YOUR VIEWS WHICH WILL BE CONSIDERED AT THE HEARING. PLEASE ADDRESS THE LETTER TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND INCLUDE THE ABOVE FILE NUMBER. IF THE ITEM IS CONTINUED TO ANOTHER HEARING BECAUSE THE AGENDA IS NOT COMPLETED, OR FURTHER INFORMATION IS NEEDED, THE DATE OF THE CONTINUED HEARING WILL BE ANNOUNCED ONLY AT THE MEETING. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION MAY BE OBTAINED AT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, 250 FIFTH AVENUE NORTH, EDMONDS (PHONE 771-3202, EXTENSION 252). THE REMOVAL, MUTILATION, DESTRUCTION, OR CONCEALMENT OF THIS NOTICE BEFORE THE DATE WARNING! OF THE HEARING IS A MISDEMEANOR PUNISHABLE BY FINE AND IMPRISONMENT. THIS NOTICE MAYBE REMOVED AFTER-A&M 19,1997 AFFIDAVIT OF P�AILING STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ss. COUNTY OF SNONOMISH ) Diane Cunningham deposes and says: C- FILE N0. �-31-87 P,PPLICANT Richard Krause being first duly sworn, on oath That on the 6th day of November ,19 87 the attached Notice of Public Hearing was mailed as .required to adjacent property owners, the names of which were provided by the applicant. Signed��� ,"� Subscribed and sworn to before me this ��/ day of �J��� 19s�• � "� �� Notary Public in and for the. State of Washington. Residing at � � MY COMMISSION EXPIRES 6=16=89. n AFFIDAVIT OF POSTER STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ss. COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH ) FILE NO. V-31-87 APPLICANT Richard Krause Duane Bowman being first duly sworn, on oath, deposes and says: That on the 6th day of November 19 87 , the attached Notice of'Public Hearing was posted as prescribed by Ordinance, and in any event, in the Frances Anderson Center and Civic Center, and where applicable on or near the subject property. Signed Subscribed and sworn to before me this ?'`� day of��c� 19-. Notary Public in and for the State or Washington. Residing at��'�c�� MY COMMISSION EXPIRES 6.16-89• - n nr .4a RS ,W7 r � s : r i w 4 e t �t ',1 r '. t'x h f t .a •` I! ' q 5 c'- t ! .,,f �} wy.....: ...t.;: 7 h,.r".f�"ti' 1 1`..' .'".: � , t .S i tt `•t rs .:., .? , ,.r. x s 1 �� .. ' .. '—� .. - e r " Am THIS PACKET SENT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER 11/12/87 EXHIBIT LIST V-31-87 EXHIBIT 1 - STAFF REPORT EXHIBIT 2 - APPLICATION/DECLARATIONS EXHIBIT 3 - VICINITY MAP EXHIBIT 4 - SITE PLAN t i. i 1 a EXHIBIT 1 STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER FILE: V-31-87 HEARING DATE: November 19, 1987 I. REQUESTED ACTION: ck Variance to allowuce the required theconstruction ofuahside garageyatd17015am to 0' to a Talbot aRoad, Edmonds. II. APPLICANT/OWNER: Richard Krause 17015 Talbot Road Edmonds, WA 98020 III. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Beginning at the East quarter corner of Section 7, Township 27, Range 4 East, W.M. along the east line of said Section, North 01 11' 45" 766.18 feet; thence West 534.58 feet, the true point of beginning; thence West 175.80 feet; thence on a curve to the right having an initial course of South 06 17' 57" West athence radius of 318 feet, a distance of 63 feet, more or less, East 189 feet, more or less, thence North 60 feet to the true point of beginning; situate in the County of Snohomish, Washington. IV. STAFF FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: A. Description of the Subject Property and Surrounding Area The subject property is located on the Weast side of Talbot al bPark Road and one lot north of 171s area of Edmonds. The subject property contains approximately 11,207 square feet. There is an existing single family home with three car garage located on the lot. The applicant collects older automobiles and presently stores a number of them outside. The applicant is seeking a variance reduce the required south side yard setback from ten feet to zero feet to allow the construction of a 20' by 40' four car garage. Surrounding development is single family residential. B. Official Street Map pro osed R/W Existing R/W West - Talbot Road 0 p 60' 60' Staff Report V-31 -87 Page 2 C. Conformance to Chapter 20.85.010 1. Special Circumstances The subject lot slopes very moderately to the west. It is narrow, but adequate room is available to build a conforming structure. 2. Special Privilege The proposed variance for the patio does appear to represent a grant of special privilege. 3. Comprehensive Plan The Comprehensive Policy Plan map designates the subject property as Low Density Residential, as are the adjacent residential properties. The proposed variance does not appear to conflict with the purposes of the Comprehensive Plan. 4. Zoning Ordinance The subject property, as well as the surrounding properties, is zoned RS-12. The proposed variance does appear to conflict with the purposes of the zoning ordinance or the RS-12 zone district. 5. Not Detrimental The proposed variance does not appear to pose any significant impact to the public or to any near by private property or improvement. 6. Minimum Variance The requested variance does not appear to represent a minimum variance request. V. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The requested variance does meet the review criteria of Chapter 20.85.010 of the Edmonds Community Development Code. While it is probably true that the proposed garage will not adversely impact any of the neighbors, this is not grounds to grant a variance. Further, the Applicant presently has a three car garage. If additional storage space is needed, another possibility would be to rent such space. fm T r"• _•w I aT� 1 i3 G .. :, JA..f < r . � �i�. pn, .........� __...u53 .i...�-.._ ............_....y..._....m�.i....tca.xW...u.i..,. a....��.w.«...s.w .w. ..,..... e..�.,...._>.. .... ..`._r. :3 t.,..4.i:.�' 'ar . • y.o. ,.tip...-._._...J........, .t:t:....c+. •� • f�f9 H Y ; �a !hi h PLEASE PRINT YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS BELOW IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM AND/OR WISH TO RECEIVE A COPY OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S FINDINGS OF FACT V-31-87 RICHARD KRAUSE VARIANCE TO REDUCE THE REQUIRED SOUTH SIDE YARD SETBACK TO 0' FOR PROPOSED GARAGE AT 17015 TALBOT ROAD. NAME ADDRESS (Include city and zip code) 3 iJ•; 4' 4 l �FGt/ 1016C 1 VFW 19 P14Nfi,,6- 1/r 8� DFpr.. FINDINGS AND DECISION OF THE HEARING EXAMINER OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION FILE: V-31-87 OF RICHARD KRAUSE FOR APPROVAL OF A VARIANCE DECISION: The variance is denied. INTRODUCTION Richard Krause, 17015 Talbot Road, Edmonds, Washington, 98020, (hereinafter referred to as Applicant) has requested a variance to reduce the required side yard setback from 10 feet to 0 feet on property located at 17015 Talbot Road, Edmonds, Washington. A hearing on the request was held before the Hearing Examiner of the City of Edmonds, Washington, on November 19, 1987. At the hearing the following presented testimony and evidence: Duane Bowman Richard Krause Planning Dept.. 17015 Talbot Road City of Edmonds Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 At the hearing the following exhibits were submitted and admitted as part of the official record of this proceeding: 1 - Staff Report 2 - Application/Declarations 3 - Vicinity Map 4 - Site Plan 5 - Photographs 6 - Letter After due consideration of the evidence presented by the Appli- cant, and evidence elicited during the public hearing, the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions constitute the basis of the decision of the Hearing Examiner. December 10, 1987 Page 1 0 HEARING EXAMINER'S DECISION RE: V-31-87 FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The application is for the approval of a variance for the reduction of a side yard setback on property located at 17015 Talbot Road, Edmonds, Washington. The Applicant's request is for the south side yard setback to be reduced from 10 feet to 0 feet in order to allow for the construc- tion of a garage at 17015 Talbot Road, Edmonds, Washington. (Staff report and Bowman testimony.) 2. The subject property is located on the east side of Talbot Road and contains approximately 11,207 square feet of land. Located on the subject property is a single-family house with a three -car garage. (Staff report.) 3. The subject property is a densely forested parcel of land. The properties to the south of the subject property are both developed with single-family dwellings. The houses on the adjoining properties are approximately 50 to 60 feet from the property line of the subject property. (Krause testimony.) 4. The subject property is zoned RS-12. Pursuant to the provisions of the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) side yard setbacks for RS-12 zoned property are required to be 10 feet. The Applicant seeks a variance from this standard. (ECDC.) 5. In order for a variance to be granted within the City of Edmonds the criteria as set forth in ECDC 20.85.010 must be satisfied. These criteria include: A. Because of special circumstances relating to the pro- perty, the strict enforcement of the zoning ordinance would deprive the owner of use rights and privileges permitted to other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning. B. The approval of the variance would not be a grant of special privilege to the property in comparison with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning. C. The approval of the variance will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Edmonds. D. The approval of the variance will be consistent with the purposes of the zoning ordinance and the zone district in which the property is located. E. The variance as approved or conditionally approved will not be significantly detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and same zone. December 10, 1987 Page 2 HEARING EXAMINER_ DECISION RE: V-31-87 F. The requested variance is the minimum necessary to allow the owner the rights enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning. (ECDC.) 6. The subject property is a relatively level parcel of land that slopes moderately to the west. Located on the property immediately south of the subject property is a gully and swamp that is undevelopable. Further south on this same property is a residence that is located on a hill. The residence is significantly higher in elevation than the subject property. According to the Applicant, to develop the swamp and gully would be expensive and prohibitive. Thus, he claims the adjoining property will never be developed up to the allowed setback for that property. (Krause testimony.) 7. The Applicant's driveway is located on the southern boundary of the subject property. The proposed garage would be located on the southeastern corner of the site and the access driveway would extend from Talbot Road to the garage. (Krause testimony.) 8. The Applicant has requested to locate the garage in the southeastern corner of the site because of the limited developability of the adjoining properties. Also, with the location of the garage on the southeastern corner, the remaining portion of the Applicant's rear yard remains useable. (Krause testimony.) 9. The house located on the subject property has an existing three -car garage. The Applicant desires extra garage space in order to store the Pontiac cars that he collects. (Krause testimony.) 10. The Applicant lives at the subject property alone. He has indicated that if the garage were built, a succeeding buyer could develop the existing garage that is attached to the house into a family room. This would make use of the residence more desirable. (Krause testimony.) 11. The Comprehensive Plan designation for the subject property is Low Density Residential. (Staff report.) 12. The City has indicated that the requested variance does appear to represent a grant of a special privilege. (Staff report.) 13. The City has indicated that the proposed variance does not appear to pose any significant impact to the public nor to nearby private property or improvements. The request represents the minimum variance request. (Staff report.) December 10, 1987 Page 3 HEARING EXAMINER'. DECISION RE: V-31-87 14. The Applicant submitted that the proposed garage will not impact any of the other property owners in the area. The City submitted, however, that this fact does not warrant the granting of a variance. CONCLUSIONS 1. The application is for the approval of a variance for the reduction of the south side yard setback for RS-12 zoned property located at 17015 Talbot Road, Edmonds, Washington. The requested variance is for a reduction from the required 10-foot setback to a 0-foot setback in order for the Applicant to construct a garage on the subject property. 2. In order for a variance to be granted within the City of Edmonds the criteria of ECDC 20.85.010 must be satisfied. These criteria have not been satisfied with this application. 3. Special circumstances do not appear to exist for the granting of the variance. Although the Applicant is limited in the location of the garage to the southeast corner of the site because of the existing design of the house, a three -car garage is available and attached to the residence. No physical limitations exist on the property to warrant granting of a variance. 4. The grant of the variance would be the grant of a special privilege. The Applicant desires the garage for extra storage space for storage of his car collection. 5. The requested variance is consistent with the Low Density Residential designation as set forth in the Comprehensive Plan. 6. The requested variance is not in conflict with the purposes of the RS-12 zone. 7. The requested variance would not create a significant impact to the public, nor to other private properties or improvements. 8. The requested variance does not appear to represent the minimum variance request. Based upon the preceding Findings of Fact and Conclusions, and the testimony and evidence submitted at the public hearing, it is hereby ordered that the requested variance for the reduction of December 10, 1987 Page 4 n HEARING EXAMINER( DECISION RE: v-31-87 the side yard setback from 10 feet to 0 feet at 17015 Talbot Road, Edmonds, Washington, for the purpose of constructing a garage on the subject property is denied. The bas6s of this denial are set forth in the Findings of Fact and Conclusion and on the following Comments: COMMENTS This variance request was very difficult to decide. The difficulty resulted because there was no neighborhood opposition voiced at the public hearing and the Applicant's intentions are obviously good and reasonable. He desires the variance in order to build a garage to house the vehicles that he collects. However, the need for such a garage does not allow for the grant- ing of a variance. In reviewing this variance many factors were considered. The Applicant presented testimony and evidence regarding the swamping, gully -like conditions on the property to the south. He also presented testimony regarding the higher elevation of the property to the south. However, no testimony was presented referring to the special circumstances of the physical conditions of the subject property to warrant a variance. From a review of the testimony it appears that the only testimony and evidence submitted about the physical condition of the subject property was the location of the existing house on site and the limita- tions of the use of the backyard for car storage purposes. This in and of itself is not grounds for the granting of a variance. The Applicant already has a three -car garage on the subject property. The grant of a variance for additional garage space would be the grant of a special privilege to the Applicant that other properties do not enjoy. It appears that the need for the variance is more out of the need for storage of the cars rather than circumstances relating to the land. It appears that the requested variance is a variance of use more than a variance from the land use standards of the City of Edmonds. As noted, this was a difficult decision to make. The garage will not harm anybody or any other properties. However, the criteria of ECDC 20.85.010 are specific and the Applicant's request does not satisfy these criteria. Accordingly, the variance must be denied. Entered this loth day of December, 1987, pursuant to the authority granted the Hearing Examiner under Chapter 20.100 of the Community Development Code of the City of Edmonds. -- JAMES M. DRISCOLL Hearing Examiner December 10, 1987 Page 5 HEARING EXAMINER'q ECISION RE: V-31-87 NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL Written appeals alleging specific error of fact or other grounds for appeal may be filed with the Planning Department, City of Edmonds, Civic Center, Edmonds, Washington, 98020, within fourteen days of the date of the Hearing Examiner's final action. In this matter any appeal must be received by the Department prior to 5:00 p.m. on December 24, 1987. December 10, 1987 Page 6 0 r so 0 rl ...rr.L��.v,.a.w.. EXHIBIT 2 FII� DATE 1>V. CITY OF EDMONDS FEE oc7 HEARING EXAMINER �G RE C Tk APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE APO'S HEARING DATE: ADDRESS APPLICANT61 CITY & ZIP��L-.yL�t�.��:P, PHONE_ INDICATE TYPE OR DEGREE OF INTEREST IN PROPERTY /2c...... � =' LOCATION OR ADDRESS OF PROPERTY /� 910 LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY Z ✓Z 2e,2 V - / - 03 7 - DUG�J' VARIANCE REQUESTED : f/jy��� ,�' --z� e �•i� !`�-�Lt/-�'-� 1�'.�;-s� _-c..U?{ y FOR OFFICE USE, ONLY : USE ZONE: /� { /,? ZONING ORDINANCE REQUIREMENT:_ Z� '`J�iP.�£'T 65-r6AC-Ae-- Release/Hold Harmless Agreement The undersigned applicant, his heirs and assigns, in consideration for the City processing the application agrees to release, indemnify, defend and hold the City of Edmonds harmless from any and all damages and/or claims .for damages, including reasonable attorneys' fees, arising from any action or inaction is based in whole or in Dart upon false, misleading or incomplete information furnished by the applicant, his agents or employees. Permission to Enter Subject Property The undersigned applicant grants his, her or its permission for public officials and the staff of the City of Edmonds to enter the subject property for the purpose of inspection and posting, attendant to this application. gnature of Applicant, Owner or presentative n F ( EXHIBIT 2 DECLARATIONS OF APPLICANT Please answer all questions 1. What are the physical characteristics, (i.e. topography, shape of lot, etc.) which create a hardship for you in regard to development of your property? 2. How does your property differ from other property in the same vicinity? 3. Will this variance be detrimental to the public or damaging to other property or improvements in the vicinity? 4. What hardships will result to you if the variance is not granted? Will these hardships have been caused by your own action? �,!/Ii' G�✓L �G1 f�.l�' � ,�-� cs--'�.c' � �.i%G.�� �-��u'�—� //�,�i����-�1 /h2C��• v!� r2��r��Le� 5. Can you make reasonable use of your property without the variance. c'�,�c���/s--�-u��� � ;C !?�� ,�; - `.-���_.• � J �-Lc'�/'--r�—,-.. �'� UGC �'-2-e.��� ,�i'?-c�-Z"�/l r_� .�,�Y. ��✓� Cam' �t.T' ' � � It � � � S ii `�1 S l.�T ��� �.'., Tj{�,�,((I�it..� �V�. �. _ N �4l�dflL�LaJ....tic.:.+:�.:+..a..ra4.c.m,M�aw.��M. 1n 4G...r._�.—.a ... ...... .....J...®. �. ...... .... .�..J.a a. � � �{Y � „t !/te�NiT EXHIBIT 3 �Keteh � c� y �::�: �,.,� '7'(o TH �! V E. W —� 4' t� 3 :Jj' i i � N NonrExe��rs;� N 6'9SErrlENT EXHIBIT 4 ,poyo J-7.z 7b —:Pr'o p e r� EX. i6TiNG r,anc R�c�uesteer! EX/S7'/NG HD USE _�7.5- N �o O O PLOT PL 19n/ veACE �"= 20' t N /YO/VEXCGGfSI1/E � � s a h ,FZ z7 EXHIBIT 5 /r1 Ex iSTiNC EX/sT/NG Ha us E Cb a 0 0 PL 19AI is cSCALE /"- 20' • Xr I.. y I 4toOr , , I N r'T* ���• h ,y T tN !- f � . r t , ,_ ,I T • — . r = , ". Jr.;:, .' .r �1 '. .. .i- . ..l ... .. for % 0 P %0 0. ti t f. A• •to ' jr r . �-' y ..•j � t'. t'$ too r ." f•tii. �•*'�' r. _.`� ...1 t:4. �. - g .,.t �t t•r-(�- .fir.• o{-+�'-t •'1;;�{�. `[ y I '. �a '1F _ .. .. L/ � � , r ley, 14J �I�F•'�A tV.N.�. ♦'. t • !f .•. �� '�...i.. '•rl(� �+ f :�'. ` ��r � a. t sad r [�(�g�y�� �` _ �`rr. _�w `,S� �.. � ..{.'.f :��-... �. �3`ew.na mot; r�-r .. ..LlC'Ci•�a^it' _ r 7 ' •r t "'Qk ISO t If It `iII • I It PIIIIIS:- Itt I •f ' ,�• ^ •F,•• a 1 of �.r 1/_ 4,1 SO Iva is Oat JA PIP f f. %'+.r . ,.! . - tom, `C '� ✓ L jf�i{!lj T^i t ` `,.�..►►►� 1,PPt tit IS rq 17 Sit / r r• u_ ',vs ��hr.e� �. f r r'r CIt. it to. i PIP y� f Nr1 'i�qr[, 7 •. . , •, f , rra � � t . ; ,`'. ,,`�y tq •c , '7 -:• '.0 ! r ' •'f;., rl _� i t - 4 L a �' �' w Y., tr•,F -'••-` ,4' ...M1,.,ti It Pr L r al:}r If •0.:r f` . it ► ` '' •� �^ IF IS It LWOW r'• r — rr,'I . 11 4' J 1 - , i -- 7 _ J Y IsLIts •�7d f. Tf' 01 ..4.0 977 ti .f , 0 to , ) I r s II.,Ial Is -) �I ♦;. 1 N i As I it TP aj� r �.Y, r If r • j 4 t'L 1 !. + My 111 Is III t. 1 tM A 1 I Itv ;y .i11;. It 1; + It ItI Is LL r i .. - .. .L. . • t f tiIIL I to ''It I� t �• J ~Z :'.7q Is ttooss ► �' • C Intl FTr I I �..+ uK 1�) M`' .Y-Itsty�S.'T:"i�. tott so I I. \= ' ' tr -< � h .t -It _ tIf- It to It' �V ..r P.}ieiri tl >rIt-It I _ ' iti ff7 liltot i l ,` If '.o I I At �Ltttt I. I I a It III 't i•41 l _ • r Q •_ tt to t 1 It to �N •... Its L 1 '� I Aso q it S z W_ t t /t + It .f , tiIt _r I I I It ado Its, + 4 + it • ` '� r la.` t Is' IT If I r;. .It fft M ljlr{f/[i r �rFor ill I /I if r. , q , I , , If n`FaOf It I It • F9 + tj tto 4 J sm =1 1 ist It Is I Is C t t.l Its �� �I a }+`It Yt — I so mots Itst llrlIt t w r..�� 1f - yam„" / i _ i r 16 If I r It t Is 61 ' J) It I I It lIt I I• J•'.?•Is � FIGI t. `• `•�f11. �.t, •.so It It ty. L V'•tLY 4Lr_..Jto y' etc , s v 1 It 61 djLt.r' ♦ a S 1+'i • 1Sr i ri }}'""�•�•�a....�.� �R ,.� r_w._. . 1M t tot It tot sr as- _ • z r ,• �Y L' l tglt, trl�t�lr _,S_ IT 44 Itt i It It I fu­ I It $ Its4 to. OILti _ ^r'r v f 1 t It It I Jr r sops _ _ _ _ III It. .i ,.If- Or _It •e -'+ • �' '�'���.._. ._. � � ___-�.... __.. _.. I.__�. .__... _._.., ..�... ._. '.. i ....,re..,. �.✓v...::.m�.a.�,.e.. «..ev i ♦ �`a aa.Aa�i.:t 7ity of Edmond(` Gary M. Fire M: INTER -OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE NOV 2(1198 Bobby M. -r PW P1 Dan Smith/Jerry Hauth - Engineering Duane Bowman N�ilnl(llD* 18/87 TO FROM DATE SUBJECT —�-o -'L') L) V-35-87 VARIANCE TO REDUCE REQUIRED 25' STREET SETBACK TO 10' TO ALLOW A REMODEL OF AN EXISTING CARPORT. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 16902 TALBOT•ROAD. (RS-12 ZONE) HEARING DATE IS: DECEMBER 17, 1987. PLEASE RESPOND WITH YOUR COMMENTS NO LATER THAN DECEMBER 8, 1987. -Ep, &gyp r- 31� — 81 THANKS. r• c;E NOV If 1997 EEDMONDS FIRE DEPM, - -.9 V-3, 1" V-35-87 NOV .i 8 ig ENGINEERING' A A /A O /Oi VARIANCE TO REDUCE REQUIRED 25' STREET SETBACK TO 10' TO ALLOW A REMODEL OF AN EXISTING CARPORT. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 16902 TALBOT ROAD. (RS-12 ZONE) HEARING DATE IS: DECEMBER 17, 1987. PLEASE RESPOND WITH YOUR COMMENTS NO LATER THAN DECEMBER 8, 1987. THANKS. 1 .. •�v..ru:a.z.u—.r..iw..x._..e.....Wlti+++r_..uW.i:.'.au.v..._a._..+tL .. 1 .r..+:k'+7tA/ bw ri4 `,ity of Edmondv Gary M. -Fire M. INTER -OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE Bobby M. -'PW t ►- Dan Smith/Jerry Hauth - Engineering Duane Bowman /j/1� 11 /18/87 TO FROM �`/� DA 19 A 8 SUBJECT LAND oFPr V-35-87 VARIANCE TO REDUCE REQUIRED 25' STREET SETBACK TO 10' TO ALLOW A REMODEL OF AN EXISTING CARPORT. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 16902 TALBOT ROAD. (RS-12 ZONE) HEARING DATE IS: DECEMBER 17, 1987. PLEASE RESPOND WITH YOUR COMMENTS NO LATER THAN DECEMBER 8, 1987. THANKS. f aG/ I . l —7,/L ( -7 ! ] Ld !' Rio J v ✓!? %� /I w / J �''' i7 i� !'j'► _ , r� r+t l /. %� i'. D..�•2-� %�y��- �Gr�� u���/�,G?'-G-c, � �ij'i „? �O S/ - / - L�,�/ - C� c� O `j 7� F �. %qy, . c? l%.,c� Q c'�a.�.iz�' ��c� �.? o �/ 3• %?�.� . rL. %2�i�r �L ��iu. �rC� G . �� �.� n �- -D -7.;? /7 0 0,2 c200 �> On -my oath, I certify that the names and addresses provided represent all properties located within 80 feet of the subject property. au", Sing ture of Applicant or Appli;c nt's Representative F,!,4.Ncribed and rn to before me this �11 day of L19q. �C, VNota y Pu lic it and for the State of Washington ,J�t_r; ;.1Y Residing at cat a i I James & Virginia Douglas 4009 164th Pl. SW Lynnwood, WA 98037 Home Savings'of America Rothaus, #00546506 Pasadena, CA 91109 - Mrs. H. Landberg/Resident 16900 Talbot Road Edmonds, WA 98020 3 1 .INs' i IsRl 1. Resident/Owner Mr. & Mrs. Rothaus/Resident,1;; 16902 Talbot Road 16912 Talbot Road Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmondsd, WA 98020 V-35-87 CITY OF EDMONDS THE 159A*llfJCrZ-WILL HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING kg$bA 9:c to 179 7 ON THE FOLLOWING APPLICATION: FILE NO. • r PROPERTY ADDRESS AND LOCATION ZONE DISTRICT e THE HEARING WILL BEGIN AT • 3"M., IN THE PLAZA MEETING ROOM, LIBRARY BUILDING, 650 MAIN STREET, EDMONDS, WASHINGTCN. IF YOU WISH TO COMMENT ON THIS PROPOSAL, YOU MAY COME TO THE HEARING AND SPEAK. YOU MAY ALSO WRITE A LETTER STATING YOUR VIEWS WHICH WILL BE CONSIDERED AT THE HEARING. PLEASE ADDRESS THE LETTER TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND INCLUDE -THE ABOVE FILE NUMBER. IF THE ITEM IS CONTINUED TO ANOTHER HEARING BECAUSE THE AGENDA IS NOT COMPLETED, OR FURTHER INFORMATION IS NEEDED, THE DATE OF THE CONTINUED HEARING WILL BE ANNOUNCED ONLY AT THE MEETING. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION MAY BE OBTAINED AT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, 250 FIFTH AVENUE NORTH, EDMONDS (PHONE 771-3202, EXTENSION 252). THE REMOVAL, MUTILATION, DESTRUCTION, OR CNCEALMENT OF OOF THEHEARING S A THIS PUNISHABLE BY FINE AND IMPRISONMENT. THIS NOTICE MAY BE REMOVE® AFTERL)LrIft-J7,11-8-7 AFFIDAVIT OF POSTER STATE OF WASHINGTON ss. COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH Duane V. Bowman being first duly sworn, on oath, deposes and says: That on the 4th day of December 19 87 , the attached Notice of'Public Hearing was posted as prescribed by Ordinance, and in any event, in the Frances Anderson Center and Civic Center, and where applicable on or near the subject property. Signed Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of i Notary Public in and for the.,, State of - Washington. --- Residing at MY COMMISSION EXPIRES '64649, r AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss. COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH ) FILE NO. V-35-87 APPLICANT James Virginia Douglas Diane M. Cunningham being first duly sworn, on oath, deposes and says: That on the 4th day of December , 19 87 , the attached Notice of Decision was mailed as required to adjacent property owners, the names of which were provided by the applicant. Signed @JaXAJ_ M. Subscribed and sworn to before me this ��✓ day of 19- Notary Public in and for thd State,of. Washington. Residing at tftMjSSION EXPIRES -7109 0 THIS PACKET SENT TO THE .. HEARING EXAMINER ON 12/11/87 EXHIBIT LIST V-35-87 EXHIBIT 1 - STAFF REPORT EXHIBIT 2 - APPLICATION/DECLARATIONS EXHIBIT 3 - VICINITY MAP EXHIBIT 4 - PLOT PLAN EXHIBIT 5 - PHOTOGRAPHS/PLOT PLAN 1 EXHIBIT 1 STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER FILE: V-35-87 HEARING DATE: December 17, 1987 I. REQUESTED ACTION: Variance to reduce the required 25 foot street setback to 10 feet to allow a remodel of an existing carport at 16902 Talbot Road, Edmonds. II. APPLICANT: James & Virginia Douglas 4009 164th Pl. S.W. Lynnwood, WA 98037 III. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: See Exhibit 2 IV. STAFF FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: A. Description of the Subject Property and Surrounding Area The subject property is near the northern end of Talbot Road, in the Talbot Park area of Edmonds. Access to the property is by way of an easement road on the west side of Talbot Road. The subject property was created by Edmonds short subdivision #S-22-63. There is an existing residence on the property. The existing carport that is located on the east side of the house extends 15 feet into the required street setback. The Applicants are asking for a variance to allow a remodel of the carport into a garage. Surrounding development is entirely single family residential. Puget Sound is located to the west. B. Official Street Map Proposed R/W Existing R/W East - Talbot Road 60' 60' C. Conformance to Chapter 20.85.010 1. Special Circumstances The existing house was placed on the lot to provide for a reasonable setback from the steep bank on the west side of the property. 0 Staff Report V-35-87 Page 2 2. Special Privilege The proposed setback variance does not appear to represent a grant of special privilege. 3. Comprehensive Plan The Comprehensive Policy Plan map designates the subject property as Low Density Residential, as are the adjacent residential properties. The proposed setback variance does not appear to conflict with the purposes of the Comprehensive Plan. 4. Zoning Ordinance The subject property, as well as the surrounding properties, is zoned RS-12. The proposed setback variance does not appear to conflict with the purposes of the zoning ordinance or the RS-20 zone district. 5. Not Detrimental The proposed setback variance does not appear to pose any significant impact to the public or to any near by private property or improvement. 6. Minimum Variance The requested variance is the minimum necessary to allow the Applicant to remodel the carport. There is no other area on the lot where covered parking could be provided. V. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff does not oppose the granting of V-35-87. December 17, 1987 Planning Department City of Edmonds Re: File No: V-35-87 Providing the entrance 'to the garage will not be located on the south side of the adjoining nroperty line, we are in agreement to this variance. Vim, Mr. and Pars. James R. Rothaus 16912 Talbot Road Edmonds, Washington 93020 771-6561 0 i/ A= 1 Dec. !'7 )9p-7 /o/ r n S PLEASE PRINT YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS BELOW IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM AND/OR WISH TO RECEIVE A COPY OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S FINDINGS OF FACT V-35-87 JAMES & VIRGINIA DOUGLAS VARIANCE TO REDUCE,THE REQUIRED 25 FOOT STREET SETBACK TO 10 FEET TO ALLOW CARPORT REMODEL AT 16902 TALBOT ROAD, EDMONDS. NAME ADDRESS (Include city and zip code) 9fa3 7 4 ■ CITY OF EDMONDS LARRY S. NAUGHTEN MAYOR 250 5lh AVE. N. • EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 98020 • (206) 771.3202 HEARING EXAMINER J41V 1V . . 'Or FINDINGS AND DECISION OF THE HEARING EXAMINER OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION FILE: V-35-87 OF JA.MES AND VIRGINIA DOUGLAS FOR APPROVAL OF A VARIANCE DECISION: The variance is granted subject to the conditions listed. INTRODUCTION James and Virginia Douglas, 4009 - 164th Place SW, Lynnwood, Washington 98037, (hereinafter referred to as Applicants), has requested approval of a variance to reduce the required 25 foot setback to 10 feet in order to remodel an existing carport at 16902 Talbot Road, in the city of Edmonds, Washington (hereinafter referred to as "subject property"). A hearing on the request was held before the Hearing Examiner of the City of Edmonds, Washington, on December 17, 1987. At the hearing the following presented testimony and evidence: Duane Bowman James Douglas Planning Dept. 4009 - 164t.h Pl SW City of Edmonds Lynnwood, WA 98037 Edmonds, WA 98020 At the hearing the following exhibits were submitted and were admitted as part of the official record of this proceeding: Exhibit 1 - Staff Report of 2 - Application/Declarations It 3 - Vicinity Map It 4 - Plot Plan it 5 - Photographs/Plot Plan it 6 - Letter from James Rothouse " 7 - Site Plan INCORPORATED AUGUST 11, 1 890 7 HEARING EXAMINER'S DECISION RE: V-35-87 Page 2 After due consideration of the evidence presented by the Appli- cants, and evidence elicited during the public hearing, the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions constitute the basis of the decision of the Hearing Examiner. FINDINGS OF FACTS 1. The Applicants have requested approval of a variance for the reduction of the street setback on property located at 16902 Talbot Road, Edmonds,Washington. The requested variance is for a reduction from the required 25 foot street setback to a 10 foot street setback. (Staff Report) 2. The subject property is located near the northern end of Talbot Road in the Talbot Park Addition of Edmonds. The property was created by Edmonds short subdivision 5-22-63, and there is a residence on site. The residence has a carport that is located on the east side of the building and the carport extends 15 feet into the required street setback. It is the Applicants' intent to convert the carport into a garage and they are seeking a variance to allow the remodel of the building with the use of the existing setbacks. (Staff Report and Douglas Testimony) 3. In order for a variance to be granted within the City of Edmonds, the criteria as set forth in ECDC 20.85.010 must exist. Those criteria include: A. Because of the special circumstances relating to the property, the strict enforcement of the zoning ordinance would deprive the owner of use rights and privileges permitted to other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning. B. The approval of the variance would not be a grant of special privilege to the property in comparison with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning. C. The approval of the variance will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Edmonds. D. The approval of the variance will be consistent with the purposes of the zoning ordinance and the zone district in which the property is located. E. The variance as approved or conditionally approved will not be significantly detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and same zone. HEARING EXAMINER'S DECISION RE: V-35-87 Page 3 F. The requested variance is the minimum necessary to allow the owner the rights enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning. (ECDC) 4. The subject property is located on a lot that has a steep bank on the west side of the property. The property has a view of Puget Sound. In order to provide for view and to have stability ii) the house the structure was designed with a reasonable setback from the steep bank on the west side. (Bowman Testimony) 5. The City has determined that the requested setback variance does not appear to represent the granting of a special privilege. (Staff Report) 6. As set forth in the Edmonds Community Development Code, the comprehensive policy plan map of the City of Edmonds designates the subject property as low -density residential. The City has determined that the proposed variance will not conflict with this comprehensive plan designation. 7. The prope:rty is zoned RS-12. There is no conflict with the requested variance and the purposes of the RS-12 zone as set forth in the ECDC. 8. Because of the limited area of the lot and the steep bank, there is no other place on site for the location of a garage. (Douglas Testimony) 9. The existing carport is not square with the residence on site. It is the Applicants' intent to shift the garage so that it conforms aesthetically and architecturally with the existing house. (Douglas Testimony) 10. The City of Edmonds did not oppose the granting of the requested variance. CONCLUSIONS 1. The application is for the approval of a variance for a reduced street setback for property located at 16902 Talbot Road, Edmonds, Washington. The requested variance is for a reduction of the required 25 foot street setback to a 10 foot street setback in order to remodel an existing carport and convert it into a garage on site. 2. In order for a variance to be granted within the City of Edmonds the criteria of 20.85.010 must be satisfied. The criteria are satisfied with this application. a '""t.. :: .».uY'cL' ' •.au.;."'.evr1 1% ' ..S:iia.rw..C.:Lu6.'u -y+ W..:;sLi:..ww...�. e...,.,.L..•....,......ct_:i...::.1�_r.r...n.c..ii�.ua:sw.......:......w.........; ::..... ......__.. _......_. . _ , �..... _..............M ..,.._.. . _.__ _..._ . w _,,,....._ .�...e.... HEARING EXAMINER'S DECISION RE: V-35-87 Page 4 3. Special circumstances exist for the granting of a variance. Because of the steep bank on the west end of the property the Applicants are limited in the locating of the garage. 4. The granting of the variance will not be the grant of a special privilege to the Applicants. The existing carport en- croaches within the setbacks and has been in that condition for numerous years. The conversion of the carport to the garage is an upgrading of the use of this property. 5. The requested variance does not conflict with the compre- hensive policy plan designation of the subject property, which is low -density residential. 6. The requested variance does not conflict with the purposes of the RS-12 zoning as set forth in the Edmonds Community Development Code. In particular it is consistent with ECDC 16.20.000 in that it reserves and regulates area primarily for family living in single family dwellings, and it provides for a use that will complement such single family dwelling use. 7. The requested variance is not detrimental to the public, nor does it impact the public or nearby private properties or im- provements. 8. The requested variance is the minimum necessary to remodel the carport into a garage. DECISION Based upon the preceding Findings of Facts and Conclusions, the testimony and evidence submitted at the public hearing, and upon the impressions of the Hearing Examiner at a site view, it is hereby ordered that the requested variance for the reduction of the street setbacks at 16902 Talbot Road, Edmonds, Washington, is granted subject to the following conditions. 1. The variance granted is for a reduction of the 25 foot required setback to a 10 foot setback. 2. The variance shall be recorded with the Snohomish County Division of Records. 3. Any remodeling of the carport shall not exceed the height of the existing house on site. 4. The Applicants shall secure all necessary building permits prior to any construction. ,�: ?,r�` �r ;. 1 � ._ .. ..- _ .,:� . .......... ...... ..... ......... S ,. ..f ,`' ' ___uu..."...,...�v......u......<...._.�o.. t....__u..� .. ,.. ..r .....,,L.,h.a,.._.u...a�.{....w_....�...l.atweLuYu..a«amr.}� 7 .... ..�... .1..: HEARING EXAMINER'S DECISION RE: V-35-87 Page 5 Entered this 4th day of January, 1988, pursuant to the authority granted the Hearing Examiner under Chapter 20.100 of the Community Development Code of the City of Edmonds. MES M. DRISCOLL H aring Examiner NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL Written appeals alleging specific error of fact or other grounds fo.r appeal may be filed with the Planning Department, City of Edmonds, Civic Center, Edmonds, Washington, 98020, within fourteen (14) days of the date of the Hearing Examiner's final action. In this matter any appeal must be received by the Department prior to 5:00 p.m. on January 18, 1987. NOTICE OF VARIANCE APPROVAL The following described property has been granted a variance, under Edmonds file #V-35-87, by the Edmonds Hearing Examiner: Lot A.of Edmonds Short Subdivision 14rS-22-63, whose tax parcel designation is 072704-1-032-0008, located in Snohomish County, Washington. The variance is granted is subject to the specific plans presented as approved by the Edmonds Hearing Examiner. The specific variance and conditions of approval are: A variance to reduce the required twenty-five foot street setback to ten feet to allow for the remodel of an existing carport. 1. The variance granted is for a reduction of the 25 foot street setback. 2. The variance shall be recorded with the Snohomish County Auditor. 3. Any remodeling of the carport shall not exceed the existing height of the the existing house on the site. 4. The Applicants shall secure the necessary building permits prior to any construction. DONE and DATED this 19th day of January, 1988 a *.gh or Attest: 'k ac ueline Parrett City Clerk NOTVARI/HEVARSR 0 4,__:xtiJ:,..a,. ,_.. L� ... _,. .i....s.u...._�a��i... «.,..,.,.....,a...e..�.,..�..J...............r,..l..�,........,.. �.... .,....,.u...a _ .w..... �_Fr: EXHIBIT 2 E CITY OF EDMONDS HEARING EXAMINER APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE APPLICANT Ben Holt Industries, Inc. FILE# DATE FEE. Db RECT APO'S ✓ HEARING DATE: -F& 7 '-1 ADDRESS 22224 Highway 99 CITY & ZIP Edmonds, Wa. 98020 PHONE_ 775-4616 INDICATE TYPE OR DEGREE OF INTEREST IN PROPERTY Owner and/or architectural control administrator LOCATION OR ADDRESS OF PROPERTY East side of 12th Ave. N. at Viewland Way LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY Lots 1 through 12 inclusive, Harbor View Estates, according to the plat thereof recorded in Volume 45 of Plats, on pages 72 and 73, records of Snohomish County, Wa. VARIANCE REQUESTED: See attached addendum FOR OFFICE USE ONLY: USE ZONE:RS-12 ZONING ORDINANCE REQUIREMENT: See attached addendum Release/Hold Harmless Agreement The undersigned applicant, his heirs and assigns, in consideration for the City processing the application agrees to release, indemnify, defend and hold the City of Edmonds harmless from any and all damages and/or claims for damages, including reasonable attorneys' fees, arising from any action or inaction is based in whole or in part upon false, misleading or incomplete information furnished by the applicant, his agents or employees. Permission to Enter Subject Property The undersigned applicant grants his, her or its permission for public officials and the staff of the City of Edmonds to enter the subject property for the purpose of inspection and posting attendant to this application. BEN HOL INDUSTRIES, INC. B President S±fHature of Applicant, Owner or Representative I ADDENDUM TO APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE VARIANCE REQUESTED: That the usual method of establishing maximum building heights, as prescribed in Chapter 21.40.030 of the Edmonds Community Development Code, be waived and in lieu thereof, that the roof elevations shown on the accompanying grading plan approved by the Edmonds Engineering Department, be established as the maximum allowable heights for any houses constructed on the respective lots. ZONING ORDINANCE REQUIREMENT: The maximum allowable building height in an RS-12 zone is 25 feet as measured in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 21.40.030 of the Edmonds Com- munity Development Code, i.e., 25 feet being the maximum allowable vertical distance above the average level of the undisturbed soil on the site, said average level being deter- mined by averaging the elevations of the downward projections of the four corners of the smallest rectangle which will enclose all of the building, excluding a maximum of 30 inches of eaves. k.5 ; I 4 ,.�... ,.-.r .�, .. ..., , ,�_....er ... ..... .... .. ,,... ,..ai.. ... ..�,..i. v_w:.v. u..«.a ._i _. �.... :l ..f4 .L .....,. ,�. .,,, ..� DECLARATIONS OF APPLICANT 1. What are the physical characteristics, (i.e. topography, shape of lot, etc.) which create a hardship for you in regard to development of your property? The slope of the Harbor View Estates property is such that the prescribed method of determining maximum building heights would permit construction of houses on certain of the lots that would deprive other lots and certain adjoining properties of otherwise avail- able scenic sound and mountain views. 2. How does your property differ from other property in the same vicinity? The Harbor View Estates subdivision, with the excep- tion of Lot 12, is undeveloped and the opportunity exists for control of building heights for the mutual benefit of the lots located therein and for the benefit of the southerly adjoining properties. 3. Will this variance be detrimental to the public or damaging to other property or improvements in the vicinity? No. The only neighboring properties that could experience impacts on existing scenic views are those properties located southerly of and adjacent to Harbor View Estates. As demonstrated in exhibits submitted herewith, the southerly adjoining pro- perties will experience less view impact by the establishment and enforcement of the maximum building heights proposed herewith than might otherwise occur as a consequence of the exercise of the usual methods of determining such heights as prescribed by the Edmonds Community Development Code. 4. What hardships will result to you if the variance is not granted? Will these hardships have been caused by your own action? Denial of the requested variance will create an avoidable impact, i.e., that houses could be con- structed in accordance with applicable regulations irrespective of scenic view considerations, with the result that certain of the lots in Harbor View Estates and certain adjoining properties would be deprived of scenic views that might otherwise be available. Such an impact would be an avoidable hardship to the present and future owners of the lots in Harbor View Estates, to the present and future owners of certain adjoining properties, and to the public in general. Such a hardship will not have f E 1y rr; s,..' [ 7 {' .r. ,.;'fv ,^ sf,' '.��`[�ry�....r s,. �x.Cr?ham A+7C't?'S�!•4..ri"air:._.'.:1�tS�tk.';i,...,^J'.,�CUa.t,G,..xJi.'+{,J..G?:PYfl�:N�..Gw+.�°,.e,.st'TviS�1r...,.dtv...,tF,c1.....tjJ,..:.;rY.u_k:.:ai:.k3t., r been caused by any action on the part of the present or future owners of the lots in Harbor View Estates but rather by the inaction of those persons respons- ible for administering not only the letter but including the spirit of the Edmonds Community Development Code. 5. Can you make reasonable use of your property without the variance? Yes. Denial of the requested variance would not deprive the present owners of reasonable use of the property. However, reasonable use does not always equate to best or proper use and in this instance, denial of the requested variance would not permit the best or proper use of the property. Approval of the requested variance would permit the planned and orderly development of the property for the benefit of all parties concerned including adjoining pro- perty owners and the general public. i1R116Ai'. r1Y.d.1,. a � EXHIBIT 3 BUILDING HEIGHT ANALYSIS FOR "HARBOR VIEW ESTATES" PROPOSED. AVG. GROUND MAX. ALLOWABLE MAXIMUM OVER HGHT. UNDER HGHT. LOT NO. ELEVATION HEIGHT PER CODE HEIGHT PER CODE PER CODE 1 274.00 299.00 297.00 2.00 2 284.60 309.60 315.00 5.40 3 319.60 344.60 332.00 12.60 4 332.40 357.40 349.00 8.40 5 347.30 372.30 366.00 6.30 6 347.50 372.50 378.00 5.50 7 349.20 374.20 380.00 5.80 8 347.90 372.90 366.00 6.90 9 329.00 354.00 349.00 5.00 10 311.10 336.10 331.00 5.10 11 280.80 305.80 305.00 .80 12 270.60 295.60 287.00 8.60 NOTES: 1. The word "code" as used above refers to the Edmonds Community Development code. 2. Average ground elevations were determined by assuming a building rectangle measuring 40 feet by 60 feet and locating same on each lot in accordance with the required front setback of 25 feet and the required sideyard of 10 feet as measured from the uphill side lot line except that the rectangles were centered on Lots 6 and 7. 3. Elevations are based ❑n City of Edmonds Datum (Mean Lower Low Water) and were secured in the course of a topographic survey by Lovell Sauerland and Associates, Inc., in 1983 prior to grading of the site into its present configuration. 0 21 EXHIBIT 4 HARBOR VIEW ESTATES SECTION 24 .TWP.27 N, R.3 E•s W.M. CITY OIt ■DMOINOS u11I X40mImH COUNTY. WA111HINOTON PUGET SOUND MACHINERY DEPOT FIYE ACRE TRACTS 25 20 >: I i noon• t � wlr 1$ To • + -- N t 12 >r �, I w..r• �.i L■OAL O//Coo.1�T10N { tools 13 Iwl10wCM Il�f IKNflvl. vllvtM M ' to lilt K•I tlM/tltl0utaao to %MM %t =µ, "COWS Or uoowIso COMMIT. ION 1.0. wilt Foal "allow Or vllq•.• ..} 11/ /O•O.Of o.otwKl M0. { +l. J M ROIi1• 1.+.• If.I mow V r----� r•-----, r---- I I I ,lit• I, I .',... I I I fit I ••rr.► •.,wooww wr Iw a•r *woo VI M/IAND WAY law aw •tw i•rww � �;..• jl it N;°-J; et L--- �M M MM TAPY I M '00ix m— nt M IK . k :,wrnrs emt. 1 L • w • » IITM • � I� 0. •.pI J.lM1/1•tl � I< Q � Q � t I oil I" i I w M/1• or Come; a" . M or M bft/►' 4 s 1 .t ORTHYIF—W ESTATES L■O■NO t LANO sll/lv/vow•• C/oo.TMICAT/ ♦ . sit C•uoo M4MM4Mt 1 ■(`a!t C/ltllC I:, 1MIf ►V1 M w•11q. vlly (11•I!f If w(IOIIt, •CCOtoo1K !•fl0 wt0■ •■ •CIY•l I.wIT W fwplvlwP. COwlflt 1� II M ►t.t%. on . • III C•Kttil ■OIN■1■I tOWfN1V If Mattis. l•..C( 1 1•it w.■•• Iw•I tM.! waMM.(■If wsti■Cloo■. 0111"' •tl 1MOvw COt.tCltt IMlt10■. fir•►. vltt fl 1(I ..O tM! t01 •MD ROC. C:1 .1 1••90 CallCIL wt wK.t[oo ooT CI11 O■ IM( Clay"O •I CowlttvC110n It CO./t(110 •.0 foal 1 w•v! •� Ivttt CIM.►t t(0 •11M •pvI110■l of TM! K•ItIK 411Cvt•It0■f. r • xC01-1 ly p, Flail IM.•1 0 let ' irIlAM1�. L t. • (art$ Iw A 4 VIM1ANO Afjr,t = KJIAC H[IUHT[[ do i rff" A&~ &CMV A -A i +r ewwh• • ! ^.1%1 VI VJRS O••i•V. «. A.I YIl —I wYfta n Nt �IMAb �'O�T . OfTAL EXHIBIT 5 'ir/mi.+1 1 w•/Y y.+IY w•.r•ar�4+� I•••• Ems IY.•Jw4w�.I y rw.ywflr•Vw M F•. r41� w.►N KIr Y.~I.wn•~•w Y\•••• I rw�wl4.rl r•I1 row• w•�wwwwll.w+w IAKA[ RMMIIr S[Cl/M . IVY. �.•A Ir1I1•�r+4lrrlr� \/I(WI ArO MAY wa.r��-.ww'yYw� •�(i'w4 w.w. • �..w o.... w\-�w�...rf .Ip Y •}�'w�n h• •Y• .MI •�Ls • w«•�N.M.wf. w �. 1 .A• nrK,[ Asl~ MOW a-e w \' .... .. .... .. is N,=II r �NrM • MN•.r r�M[r \ •rwliil"u- , NI .. r••/ 4 4 � �r ram. 1. 1\ Y��11tI►1•I.YVIM�• Yam\ wt• ��O 1.•�FY •.Z-.\ alllyr\r• .r ....Yrrrrr.�ww+�.rr1\\M, \• Ir 11-•' 1rr wl' rr,w. M MM1 i.MMrrwrwi • •• Y.Yr $.dim M W■ 1. ..•`.wlwilr"". 0 " ~Iw'...Tr.'.r.w..,14 on .. .; .M•.I.rM 1l1 lti 11. ��rr•.•m w� r� l YNM�M\I'Ib.0 i•Iw.r1Y 1 IYI Y\rjMrM �I r•1\ M Yrwrl~ •I41. mt am w1 M•M.I.yY..YN .wYwb. • r--(�rr��!•11 1• wy S \111 •rr�•✓•1yM!PM. H 11�rr��w1 Yr\I•\ rr�. 1\,ZM' •1.\ Y••~\ Y .'.~WINI M YINNY. 4 16:1-1 111r Ir11. Y. aL w' 'rgii p..•4u••r.• MOAO AM STOMA DRANAK /LAM root ono vICW CCTATFS ARoJ� . /1 HE IA Or 11[ I A. SECTIC" 2A.T. a, L-WAL VASNMTOM I p ' �. .r.. •rw � •'•Yi �j•�11A I LOTS t :::.~; 4 EXHIBIT i : ...r..l.w : 1 so Wr -- LVT a -- 50 va till 11 _ 1 ff , T --- I -- -i 1 jT 't`7 I � F�j .. � i .0 � I f 1 Yt. • � :r ,in - _ rr '. - 1 - ,.1 t_ j try,;.• :_I' I. aM�N I 1 ... 1 ^,,j't _ - Y . _.".. _ . _1— '�....._}.. .: .1 I�J:{. t-` . 1 : TC 1 I._ -..1. .. . ,. 'C�_.. { •.I. �. SL y _ -- sib• � ri, � t_ � 1 - 1..3 I .� _,,, }. 1-. ` :r .. 1. _ .. F • .'Mjw �� •� 1 i}} "�' fl ' I _ .�!.'L;.-. Y.'-1-. i Iry }+3. }.t- 1. —�-• � y '1 �.:t. j 1 { I:. T ly y j_ -�%.i _. 1•-�t I.rh ' _ w_' r• �; T � 1 ; .:::: i=r- �fr, �-`I�...}...7+; -�-. f.:.�+1� ..i' . {. t:`rr i'-� � � --} }:' y-ry : . •r•'• TAN _ - ..• ,y� 1..,�. ...... ... :rt- ' _ li ~ 'f 1 1.7 1 L. 'IJ ♦+iJ. 1' 1 . - - ' -- .. ... FIT 3/ - L: �•._I:t•' -1. •:rr: �I flr .. _._ _ .. _ .. ... 1, .w►,WN`. 50- � _— .. r—I • �F-:. .. ' T j� � *,•t 1 : _ _ '{ + • . -� -:_I __'."r. LOT i T tip _. '• --J• 1"'- _ i r 'L'`F.'1' ( • r':AMWaw MM NtV�T - - - ��� '__ . .-..� .. -� I � . �.-. .:�:1.1� t -I_ • �� 1/e /�..4.�+rT_tnra. sue. •.r. new) ly T. .... ..... - .. .. ... .. ..... .. L ih t7 r.. .ww. L.J__r y_..:. r. ": ,I ,.,.:� 1 I' �' : j r � t Ff 1t�' ♦ I TJy,=. 1 1....� i..- --1- :•.1 -'--.WC Q�NU01M0-►RO/L[f••t jl': 1 �I; I f ri } HAR@QR VIEW ESTATES �,�- '. � I I I .. � " I � t 1 ._�. __ � _ -j . [0/.OnOf. � •wa S/�nCTp+ r t , 4 I) v-2 ■ 86 C'-� 1. o .r n 439 1450 . , a. 193z o = 144i j 1420 I430 o a Q 192E 1420 0 / v Q�v 1428 1916 19516 N O O .�. V C ` Ig02 144I ob �'� 1047 11 4 1412 19518 O N 8 Igz4 a` SUNSTONJ: N 1 aL' 1.40$ 1410 ^_� �9 19520 19515 00 �, 1�s a . ;qo7 MOO - pRl IV Vv PUGET D RIVE N tl rn P SITE o g 1327 1324 r3xJ UGE ►ill 1319 Z 1312 1315 13IE j 13r3 1312 � ORTH 13°9Q j 1302 N i Q a 1303 1304 1305 v 1304 1305 j 4 R 1221 1225 1930 1231 r���c �/ew I225 C7- 1228 Q` T CLomjrArgAY 1215 X ►218 1217, 1214 1213 _ .�'�g5 `,r; ,1�� ` r44� �.j'�•` .�J€��� • �'�, 5'rPFnRs } VIEwI N WA GN JA CH •� \ i 1;O N �c�Ot, N7- ��f tM`� �..,. iN •. 1 �t VIEWLAM WA Y V/fWLAND WAY Nst'i� ' �# k rd' �%a".•i"'r 1�+' _ -- N -2 o h � o 'Of o a 1125 N � y�NDLF a 112q-' = IloB 1910.4 j CIO o.N N 112. fllq 1J16 IUB 1107 ti103 19ezt {gale 19a21 t Irob ; I103 y lioo ODKMERE ST o iooe ioob /021 1011 solo Ilol /03r } fort , a a IrY15 1004 /990� 1'19N ; 1025 /0r4 \% • 19904 ;1 2 1002 1o04 1001 loog look 932 r - 4 1008 10/6 1 f Z 923 925' 927 929 929 926 928 950 1610 19924 199Ib �s roil 2 928 M P `°0 930 916 9r9 9/8, 920\� 931 N N 200/0 i a, P a, 9zo 921 93o aalsss �. o Q ` v-s.a VISTA WAY i! Q 914 W 910 8 �I \ $28 B26 9I1 9zo 20010 tn 9/3 829ti ;.i u . g35 > 910 ° Q 900 10I44 ago 90; 902 o p M ^ M 757 920 per. B(,l p o o No 0 7S's mot z ? 833 $5r GK�E o 0 all a !- 8ro f m 7975o PIN , h 801 : I o N 4 M M 800 $01 CASCADE 02 7111 839 835 1 83I !- '737 _ o } 7r9 r` 718 = b: w 71l 7/8 1,31 CAROL WAY CgRo AY 703 SIERRA PL.' 615 4/4 , ' 702 v M �� c o M2 N 701 605 CO2 z0J�7 °` o 0 0 6 21 g 1 i SSo � W 2a7rr G12 � � 603 612 p I � � =L 560 a nS1 i 60q tt M N GLEN 5z0 Qom' tz SA SIERRA sr o M M o .� c ST. 1 531 520 H Z 53 a o 0 0 $ �' 01 622 c 1"T 516 P� 2 321 510 a 17 W p _ tolt2 101 0 � 0 ^ 1�1 iv � rn � �^ g H 15c5 � � � � ��oc J502 \413 I / 443 446 2o31q I� III OALEY _ ST _ I It Dr. 1 433"w /.�._. / I qL8 --1\ o / • I — 11 ''' . $06 4 4 e. .re..�.�,..--._.� r._._. .Add __..".. .. _.._ .. .. v INN t d#4 ..0 9� Y' 8 F,oI' I I G _. .. .. rp .._. .I t.i; .bi � �.t ' I • � I _. � It,4 I' � y t7 ,�? � irs Its IWO IT I i t I I � ! - II ; a I- iN I I fIr °op ' I •11^4V 1 .fi rA I r,6jsifx�sjTl ` It I,`� 4C 8`w LL I it r '•; i I i j I r I • I i I I f I pf it tp rr Lp ) M Ir L oft Y l`!d 11 i I I ag1;1u` t'. .. � �'•1 :fir` d ,. 'I � t ,. � � , � ,- .', '.. `4kStkci d ,r, s,• �: o ' `A.�itw ia` � - :d+� r f` f"j,`': 3�yfE�e��::_i ,it..ia:'...,. �'.ss li, ,t, _ I ..:.mt....::.m::.�aiu.&.wic+i).u.•v3Fu.`Sek ,. a.,,,,,_..,_.<.t,..n. E 1 #•,pity of Edmonc..j AUG 07 lHs lBMcComas -.Fire Mar. INTER -OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE CITY of tu,v,,,,vuS Bobby y. Mills:- P.W. Dan Smith/Jerry Hauth - Eng. Duane Bowman Aug. 1, 1986 TO FROM DATE SUBJECT V-24-86 VARIANCE REGARDING,METHOD OF ESTABLISHING MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHTS• FOR LOTS 1 THROUGH.12 OF HARBORVIEW ESTATES (RS-12) SEE ATTACHED ADDENDUM FOR DETAILED INFORMATION. HEARING DATE:. AUGUST 26, 1986 PLEASE RESPOND WITH YOUR COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AUGUST 15, 1986. THANKS. RECEIVED AUG 04 1986 :EDMONDS FIRE DEPT_. d Y1? A��it.!- � ,je { tiliF'ivu�n Rsdl'f��~uDin'mtk .ipi v...�t rx9.- s f EdM' n(.w.S Cr � t,/ O O 1 �� Gary McComas Fire Mar< ENTER -OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE N?6bby Mills. P.W. Dan Smith/Jerry Hauth Eng. Duane Bowman Aug. 1, 1986 TO FROM DATE SUBJECT V-24-86 VARIANCE REGARDING,METHOD OF ESTABLISHING MAXIMUM BUILDING HEI.GHTS FOR LOTS 1 THROUGH. 12 OF HARBORVIEW ESTATES (RS-12) SEE ATTACHED ADDENDUM FOR -DETAILED INFORMATION. HEARING DATE: AUGUST 26, 1986 . 1�1 PLEASE RESPOND WITH YOUR COMMENTS NO'LATER THAWAOGST 151986. THANKS. RECEIVED AUG 0 61986 CITY. OF EDMONDS,. f t't l G<4k�r-rft+.. 1"r7' 3:>L�3<;fii.'�+k..!.,»?,i!«`,.....1 .....-.. .. .. .... ,._ ..... ... .. ... .... .......,,.. .... .... .. ...,,.,.o..>....,.,.�...«,...-.,»...y.�....,..,.....+....i:.,. .. .�........_.r city of EdmonLs Gary McComas Fire Mar. Bobby Mills.- P.W. (�INTER-OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE Vban Smith/Jerry Hauth - Eng. Duane Bowman Aug. 1, 1986 TO FROM DATE SUBJECT V-24-86 VARIANCE REGARDING -METHOD OF ESTABLISHING MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHTS FOR LOTS 1`THROUGH.12 OF HARBORVIEW ESTATES (RS-12) SEE ATTACHED ADDENDUM FOR DETAILED INFORMATION. HEARING DATE:' AUGUST 26, 1986 PLEASE RESPOND WITH YOUR COMMENTS NO' LATER THAN AUGUST 15, 1986. THANKS. RECEIVED AUG �l 1986 ENGINEERING 'Alb p�eri�`�on �, �jis /P�dos� �rorh G�gl/7PF!^ih4 �e,Pf `%. GERALD W. LOVELL, P.L.S. JURGEN P. SAUERLAND, P.L.S. ROBERTS. JONES, P.E. Lovell-Sauerland & Associates, Inc. S ) Engineers a Surveyors a Development Consultants a Planners July 31, 1986 LSA File No. 82-871A Edmonds Planning Department Edmonds Civic Center Edmonds, Wa. 98020 Re: Proposed building height variance for Lots 1 through 12 inclusive, Harbor View Estates Gentlemen: Following are the names and addresses of the persons owning property adjacent to or within 80 feet of Harbor View Estates: W.R. Gross 1141 Viewland Way N. Edmonds, Wa. 98020 George Stoss 1231 - 12th Ave. N. Edmonds, Wa. 98020 Gertrude Domenici 19804 Maplewood Drive Edmonds, Wa. 98020 Richard Beselin 1108 - 12th Ave. N. Edmonds, Wa. 98020 City of Edmonds Edmonds Civic Center Edmonds, Wa. 9820 R.D. Williamson Acct. No. 2-103501-0 c/o Pacific First Fed. S & L 1400 - 4th Ave. Seattle, Wa. 98101 Sincerely, Gerald W. Lovell, P.L.S. GWL:llk Eunice Havenar 1213 - 12th Ave. N. Edmonds, Wa. 98020 Joseph D. Driano 1315 - 12th Ave. N. Edmonds, Wa. 98020 Jerry Tilley 940 Mountain Lane Edmonds, Wa. 98020 Steven B. Dowen 1154 Viewland Way Edmonds, Wa. 98020 Nina J. Grader 17239 Greenwood Ave. No. Seattle, Wa. 98133 23106 - 100TH W. EDMONDS, WA 98020 PHONE 775-1591 5 Ben Holt, President R-B-WT1liams-an Ben Holt Industries 22224 Highway 99 Edmonds, WA 98020 Gerald Lovell Pacific First Fed. S&L Lovell-Sauerland & Assoc. R.D. Williamson Acct. # 2-103501-0 23106-100th Ave. W.1400 4th Avenue Edmonds, WA 98020 Seattle, WA 98101 W.R. Gross Eunice Havenar 1141 Viewland Way N. 1213 12th Ave. N. Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Joseph D. Driano George Stoss 1315 12th Ave. N. 1231-12th Ave. N. Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Jerry Tilley Gertrude Domenici 940 Mountain Lane 19804 Maplewood Drive Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Richard Beselin Steven B. Dowen 1154 Viewland Way 1108-12th Ave. N. Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 R.D. Williamson Nina J. Grader 1305 12th Ave. N. 17239 Greenwood Ave. No. Edmonds, WA 98020 Seattle, WA 98133 v� ` .�,,-•�i`+v:.'°tl.U7..tl�.zP.��e,�..�+.�..o.. t..a ���-.e .a,�r.....�.. ,F�. ._..s. s. ..... ........... , . _..,. �._ _ aJ..�,.... I�...�. CITYof r�' M. s` i N 0 T C' E OFU BI r ,V,Y w r' '. ,:� r A �� `: � t�o r . � � 1. � t v i r ty, THE HEARING EXAMINER WILL HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING TUESDAY, AUGUST 26, 19 86 ON THE FOLLOWING APPLICATION: FILE NO. V-24-86 VARIANCE TO ALLOW CALCULATION OF HEIGHT BASED ON NEWLY ESTABLISHED GRADE OF SITE RATHER THAN THE ORIGINAL UNDISTURBED SOIL GRADE FOR HARBORVIEW ESTATES. AND, FOR ONE LOTTO EXCEED THE HEIGHT LIMIT AS MEASURED FROM THE NEW GRADE BY 3'. PROPERTY ADDRESS AND LOCATION HARBORVIEW ESTATES - EAST SIDE OF 12TH AVE, N AT VIEWLAND WAY, RS-12 ZONE DISTRICT THE HEARING WILL BEGIN AT 7 ' 30 PM., IN THE CONFERENCE ROOM OF THE COMMUNI- TY SERVICES BUILDING, 250 FIFTH AVENUE NORTH, EDMONDS, WASHINGTON. IF YOU WISH TO COMMENT ON THIS PROPOSAL, YOU MAY COME TO THE HEARING AND SPEAK. YOU MAY ALSO WRITE A LETTER STATING YOUR VIEWS WHICH WILL BE CONSIDERED AT THE HEARING. PLEASE ADDRESS THE LETTER TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND INCLUDE THE ABOVE FILE NUMBER. IF THE ITEM IS CONTINUED TO ANOTHER HEARING BECAUSE THE AGENDA IS NOT COMPLETED, OR FURTHER INFORMATION IS NEEDED, THE DATE OF THE CONTINUED HEARING WILL BE ANNOUNCED ONLY AT THE MEETING. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION MAY BE OBTAINED AT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, 250 FIFTH AVENUE NORTH, EDMONDS (PHONE 771-3202, EXTENSION 252). THE REMOVAL, MUTILATION, DESTRUCTION, OR CONCEALMENT OF THIS NOTICE BEFORE THE DATE WARN I NG" IN OF THE HEARING IS A MISDEMEANOR PUNISHABLE BY FINE AND IMPRISONMENT. AUGUST 26, 1986 THIS NOTICE MAY E REMOVED AFTER r� i��q ���k�;�' '�� dYs a�.v�• • f1 � td} `r�x��' �i �`,3;ylr � � �,. a 3W�:�Cc�S` c r k� AFFIDAVIT OF POSTER STATE OF WASHINGTON FILE NO. V-24-86 APPLICANT Ben Holt ss. COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH ) Jimmy Lee being first duly sworn, on oath, deposes and says: That on the 15th day of August 19 86 the attached Notice of Public Hearing was posted as prescribed by Ordinance, and in any event, in the Frances Anderson Center and Civic Center, and where applicable on or near the subject property. Signed Subscribed and sworn to before me this 19 fC . Notary Public in and for the State of Washington. Residing at��=`,Q,/ n r�� +. �'�s�.��tsS�s',3.`oA•d."� ��,�st't .. •�ve 1�1�,�.tis:uuwt,ei`v{ck.%,a^::r1: d:. iit..c:ftT,�:uta.J°.�l:,�h,�xSi6:,:s4:3.�h::a:x.�'!a«u,:.:-wus..:,t.�,a:,�iu .,:ic,::=�r.F.:,.. ..rt...,v�:,w...uL,i'.:..i',vs,:�ia:ai3,zu„i.,t..i:.ir fa.... _.t.::,;. i' =t d f FILE NO. V-24-86 APPLICANT Ben Holt AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ss. COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH ) Susan Painter being first duly.sworn, on oath depose§ and says: That on the 15th day of August ,19 86 the attached Notice of Public Hearing was mailed as required to adjacent property owners, the names of which were provided by the applicant. Signed Ld . P' Subscribed and sworn to before me this /-9j6-4" day of 19 ':� ?otaryv Public in and for the. State of Washi gton. Residing at n 7�S 'U �. 9 : ( N} �. }i v?�, fin.'• 1 { '� '„'�1,,, ` ��e'i.2d„4�„�d�{' T T °+aY' i1 � '� fi� Wfii-.�`�L�OK�i F rs� y r;5, nF.�'#�r}%�S'�tatiY2�7llVFfiL'�dirC6�ii r.q�" �C.,,..4io..St`v.uv�u.v1v,;�......uur..ce.�s ...,,......_.. _ ._ ._ _ ....a.. __ .._. a..i!Rn1 :.-,.,�i..,..5.✓.+, a'h ._ ...... �.,.�:�� CITY OF EDMONDS 250 5th AVE. N. • EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 98020 • (206) 771.3202 COMMUNITY SERVICES NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETING HEARING EXAMINER LARRY S. NAUGHTEN MAYOR PETER E. HAHN DIRECTOR All interested persons are hereby notified that a special meeting of the Edmonds Hearing Examiner will be held on Tuesday, August 26, 1986 at 7:30 p.m., in the City of Edmonds Community Services Conference Room, 250 Fifth Avenue N., Edmonds, Washington, to discuss the following: V-24-86 BEN HOLT Variance to allow calculation of height based on newly established grade of site rather than the original undisturbed soil grade for Harborview Estates. And, for one lot, to exceed the.height limit as measured from the new grade by 31. (East side of 12th Avenue N. at Viewland Way.) (RS-12) NEWS RELEASE ONLY TRANSMITTED FROM THE EDMONDS PLANNING DIVISION AUGUST 18, 1986 PUBLIC WORKS PLANNING • PARKS AND RECREATION ENGINEERING 0 THIS PACKET SENT TO HEARING a EXAMINER ON AUGUST 20, 1986 EXHIBIT LIST V-24-86 EXHIBIT 1 - STAFF REPORT EXHIBIT 2 - APPLICATION/DECLARATIONS EXHIBIT 3 - HEIGHT CALCULATIONS EXHIBIT 4 - PLAT OF HARBORVIEW ESTATES EXHIBIT 5 - GRADING PLAN EXHIBIT 6 - GRADING CROSS -SECTIONS EXHIBIT 7 - VICINITY MAP EXHIBIT 1 STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER FILES: V-24-86 HEARING DATE: August 21, 1986 I. REQUESTED ACTION: Variance to allow calculation of height based on newly established grade of site rather than the original undisturbed soil grade for the Plat of Harborview Estates, and, for one lot, to exceed the height limit as measured from the new grade by 3'. II. APPLICANT/OWNER: Ben Holt Industries Attn: Ben Holt 22224 Highway 99 Edmonds, WA 98020 III. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Rep. - Jerry Lovell Lovell-Sauerland & Associates 23106 100th Ave W. Edmonds, WA 98020 See Exhibit 2 IV. STAFF FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: A. Description of the Subject Property and Surrounding Area The subject property is the 12 lot subdivision located on the east side of 12th Ave. N., north of Viewland Way. The City granted preliminary approval for the subdivision in September of 1982, under file #P-2-82. Final plat approval was granted on April 24, 1984. The Applicant is seeking the requested variances to complete the planned development of the lots insuring the view potential for all the lots in the subdivision. The one lot seeking to exceed the 3' exception is Lot 6, which had the steepest slope originally. Surrounding development is for the most part single family residential. Maplewood Park abuts the subject subdivision to the east. The property to the north is undeveloped. B. Official Street Map Proposed R/W Existing R/W West - 12th Ave. N. 40' 40' 0 isfu.., isuv�'usa"'3r�3.� �� }yk _,.,x3.,•2 (r( I Staff Report V-22-86 & CU-28-86 Page 2 Viewland Way 40' 40' C. Conformance to Chapter 20.85.010 1. Special Circumstances Special circumstances do appear to exist in this particular case. The original grade on the subject property was very irregular. The grading that was done on the site was for the purpose of providing proper access and utilities. Calculating building heights from the original grade would create view problems not only in the subject subdivision, but also for the adjoining properties to the south. This would be true for 9 of the 12 lots. 2. Special Privilege The proposed variance does not appear to represent a grant of special privilege. While three lots, Lots 2, 6, & 7, will benefit from the variances, the nine remaining lots will actually be below the code height limit. 3. Comprehensive Plan The Comprehensive Policy Plan map designates the subject property and surrounding area as Low Density Residential. The proposed variance, does not appear to conflict with the purposes of the Comprehensive Plan. 4. Zoning Ordinance The subject property, as well as the surrounding area, is zoned RS-12. The proposed variances do not appear to conflict with the purposes of the zoning ordinance or the RS-12 zone district. 5. Not Detrimental The proposed variances do not appear to pose any significant impact to the public or to any near by private property or improvement. 6. Minimum Variance Staff Report V-22-86 & CU-28-86 Page 3 The requested variances do appear to represent a minimum variance requests. V. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: It is understandable why the applicant is seeking the requested variances. Logically, in prime view areas, one strives to maintain the maximum amount of view for all properties, existing as well as those in the proposed development. The proposed height calculation benefits not only the lots in the subdivision, but also the undeveloped lots located to the south. Should the variances be granted, the applicant shall file a concomitant agreement with the City insuring that the heights limits established in Exhibit 3 will be the maximum allowed for each individual lot. i a ; ``•w . u,.� �f(� .,s.. ,�S -''' ,r, i - d}fi .xd s ..!_ is 1 `, +, - ! ! , n x i� N 1 F .. �F.iti�Fy'""�, . - - �+�+if"s4tA3ffixRf'Ci6�a�tia�+�i2;mix�4T�•'8��'i�+'�."1i�S�x�wz�"af�ita...a..cr.�.�,._Yk�ll�t._ �1i:._�..w..u�t:,a.+..au,�1u.�.'" :� -"':.. ' �.._, Y•'.:... PLEASE PRINT YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS BELOW IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM AND/OR WISH TO RECEIVE A COPY OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S FINDINGS OF FACT V-24-86 BEN HOLT INDUSTRIES, INC. Variance to allow calculation of height based on newly established grade of site rather than the original undisturbed soil grade for the Plat of Harborview Estates, and, for one lot, to exceed the height limit as measured by the new grade by 3'. The subdivision is located east of 12th Avenue N., south of Puget Drive. NAME e5Y LOU ADDRESS 'Z 1 C7 C,:;, — i 00`t`�—t . AVE , W tint-� O tom►. 'P5 g�2.C� 9? 0 CITY OF EDIVI®N®S 250 51h AVE. N. • EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 98020 • (206) 771.3202 HEARING EXAMINER FINDINGS AND DECISION OF THE HEARING EXAMINER OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION FILE: V-24-86 OF BEN MOLT INDUSTRIES FOR APPROVAL OF A VARIANCE DECISION: The variance shou.1-Ar be granted subject to the conditions listed. INTRODUCTION R E u E I V E D S E P 1 ? 1986 C'A RYAS. tSAUGfTTEi�S MAYOf1 Preliminary plat #P-2-82 was approved by the City Council of the City of Edmonds on April 24, 1984. The Applicant-, Ben Holt Industries, 22224 Highway 99, Edmonds, Washington, 98020, is the developer of said preliminary plat. In developing the property the Applicant has graded the site. lie has submitted a building height analysis for the 12-lot subdivision. Contained in the building height analysis is a proposed maximum height for 9 of the 12 buildings to be erected on the 12 lots. Three of the lots, lots 2, 6 and 7, have a proposed maximum height that exceed the City of Edmonds height standards for RS-12 zoned property. The Applicant has requested that the City review the height analysis prepared for the 12 lots and that a variance be granted for the three mentioned lots in order to exceed the 25-foot height restric- tion for these lots. A hearing on the request was held before the Hearing Examiner of the City of Edmonds on August 26; 1986. At the hearing the following presented testimony and evidence: Duane Bowman Jerry Lovell Planning Dept. 23106 - 100th Ave. West. City of Edmonds Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 9802!0 Ben Holt 22224 Hwy 99 Edmonds, WA 98020 At the hearing the following exhibits were submitted and admitted as part of the official record of these proceedings: Exhibit 1 - Staff_ Report it 2 - Application/Declarations of 3 - Height Calculations 0 Findings and Deci._ton of the Hearing Examiner of the City of Edmonds Re: V-24-86 Page 2 Exhibit 4 - Plat of Harborview Estates of 5 - Grading Plan If 6 - Grading Cross -Sections " 7 - Vicinity Map After due consideration of the evidence presented by the Applicant; evidence elicited during the public hearing; and, as a result of the personal inspection of the subject property and surrounding areas by the Hearing Examiner, the following I?indings of Fact and Conclusions constitute the basis of the decision of the Hearing Examiner. FT.NDINGS OIL FACT 1. On April 24, 1984, the City Council of the City of Edmonds granted approval of preliminary plat #'rP-2-82 for a 12-lot subdivision known as I-iar_borview Estates. The proposed sub- division is located at the east side of 12th Avenue North, north of Viewland Way, in the City of Edmonds, Washington. (Staff report.) 2. The subject property has been graded and is ready for develop- ment. Some of the proposed lots within the subd:i.vision have: been sold. (.Lovell testimony.) 3. The Applicant has submitted to the City of Edmonds a building height analysis for the proposed buildings to be located on the lots of the subdivision. The building height analysis, submitted as Exhibit 3, and by this reference hereby incor- porated as part of these findings, sets forth the proposed maximum height of buildings located on the lots within the subdivision. (Exhibit 3.) 4. Of the 12 buildings proposed to be developed on the lots within the subdivision, 9 of them satisfy the 25-foot height requirement of the City of Edmonds for RS-12 zoned property. However, lots 2, 6 and 7 exceed the 25-foot height limit. it is for these lots that the Applicant seeks a variance. (Bowman testimony and Staff report.) 5. In order for a variance to be granted within the City of Edmonds the criteria as set forth in Section 20.85.010 of the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) must be satisfied. These criteria include: A. Because of special circumstances relating to the property, the strict enforcement of the zoning ordinance would deprive the owner of use rights and privileges permitted to other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning. B. The approval of the variance would not be a grant of special privilege to the property in comparison with the limitation,-, upon other properties °_n the vicinity with the same zoning. -2- a Findings and Dec of of the Hearing Examiner of the City of Edmonds Re• V-24-86 Page 3 C. The approval of the variance will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Edmonds. .D. The approval of the variance will be consistent with the purposes of the zoning ordinance and the zone district in which the property is located. E. The variance as approved or conditionally approved will not be significantly detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and same zone. F. The requested variance is the minimum necessary to allow the owner the rights enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning. (ECDC. ) 6. As noted, the subject property has been graded. Prior to grading the property was irregular and was difficult to develop with access and utilities. With the grading the site has become more uniform. (Staff_ report and Bowman testimony.) 7. The property faces the west and Puget Sound. The property adjoining the subject property on the west and north is at a lower elevation than •the subject property. The property to the east, the Northview Estates, is at a lower elevation and the only portion of that property that will. be impacted will be lots 2, 3 and 4. however, lot 3 of the adjoining property to the east has been divided with half of the lot becoming lot 2 and the other half now being lot 4. With this division no impacts of views from the two lots of Northview will occur. (Bowman testimony.) 8. With the granting of a variance all the lots within the pro- posed subdivision will be accorded a view. The remaining 9 lots within the subdivision will be below code height limit. No special privilege will be granted to the Applicant if this variance is granted. (Staff report and Bowman testimony.) 9. The Comprehensive Policy Plan Map of the City of Edmonds designates the subject property as .Low Density Residential. (Staff report.) 10. The Planning Department of the City of Edmonds submitted that if a variance is granted the Applicant shall file a concomi- tant agreement with the City ensuring that the height limits established in Exhibit 3 will be the maximum allowed for each lot. (Staf_f_ .report. ) CONCLUSIONS 1. The application is for the approval of a variance to allow =lC 0 Findings and Dectoon of the Hearing Examiner of. the City of Edmonds Re: V-24-86 Page 4 structures on lots 2, 6 and 7 of the plat of H arborview Estates to exceed the height limit of. 25 feet. 2. In order for a variance to be granted within the City of Edmonds the criteria as set forth in Section 20.85.010 of the ECDC must be satisfied. The request of the Applicant satisfies these criteria. 3. Special circumstances exist for the granting of a variance. Because of the elevation and location of the subject property and the lots within the subject property, no impact to adjoin- ing properties will result. In addition, in order to create a uniform and standard slope within the proposed subdivision the granting of the variance will allow the lo-�:s 2, 6 and 7 to be developed with building heights that exceed the 25-foot limit. 4. The granting of the variance is not a special privilege to the Applicant. Nine of the 12 lots satisfy the height requirement and, in fact, are below the height requirements. 5. The Comprehensive Plan of the City of Edmonds designates the subject property as Low Density Residential. The requested variance does not conflict with the purposes of this plan. The requested variance does not conflict with the purposes of the zoning ordinance or the RS-12 zone district. 6. No existing views or views in proposed developments will be impacted by the granting of a variance. 7. The requested variance appears to be the minimum request for the Applicant to develop the property in a manner similar to other properties in the vicinity. nRrTgTON Based upon the preceding Findings of Pact and Conclusions; the testimony and evidence submitted at the public hearing, and upon the impressions of the Bearing Examiner at a site view, it is hereby ordered that the variance request be granted. The specific variance request is granted for lots 2, 6 and 7 of the I-Iarborview Estates Plat to exceed the height limit of 25 feet. The particular variance granted is for the allowance of lot 2 to exceed the height limit by 5.4 feet; lot 6 to exceed the 25-foot height limit by 5.5 feet; and, lot 7 to exceed the 25-foot height limit by 5.8 feet. These variances are granted subject to the following conditions: 1. The Applicant is to secure. covenants from all property owners of the Harborview ',;,states plat in which the property owners agree that any buildings on the proposed lots shall not exceed the proposed maximum height as set forth in Exhibit 3, which is attached hereto. These covenants are to be recorded with the plat. -4- 0 G,fti t I Findings and Dec.on of the Hearing Examiner of the City of Edmonds Re: V-24-86 Page 5 2. The variance for lots 2, 6 and 7 shall not exceed that as granted. 3. The Applicant is to secure all necessary permits prior to construction. Entered this 9th day of September, 1986, pursuant to the authority granted the Hearing Examiner under Chapter 20.100 of the Community Development Code of the City of.Edmonds. ]"sS M. DRISCOL II aring Examiner NOTZ OF RIGHT TO APPEAL Written appeals alleging specific error of fact or other grounds for appeal may be filed with the Planning Department, City of Edmonds, Civic Center, Edmonds, Washington, 98020, within fourteen (14) days of the date of the Hearing Examiner's final action. In this matter any appeal must be received by the Department prior to 5:00 p.m. on September 23, 1986. -5- 0 0 CITY OF EOMOIV OB 250 5th AVE. N. • EDMONDS. WASHINGTON 98020 • (206) 771.3202 HEARING EXAMINER Is FINDINGS AND DECISION OF THE HEARING EXAMINER OF THE CITY`_OF EDMONDS IN THE MATTER F THE APPLICATION FILE V-24-86 OF BEN HOLT INDUSTRIES FOR APPROVAL OF A VARIANCE AMENDED DECISION LARRY S. NAUGHTEN MA (Clh On September 9, 1986, the Applicant was granted variances forlots 2,6, and 7 of the Harborview Estates Plat (P-2-82). The variances that were granted allowed the Applicant to exceed the 25 foot require- ment for heights in an RS-12 zone. The justification for the variances was set forth in the September 9, 1986 document. On September 15, 1986, the Applicant, through his engineer, submitted a request for a clarification or modification of the decision. The basis of the request was that the actual variance requestd was "That the usual methods of establishing maximum building heights as prescribed in Chapter 21.40.030 Edmonds Community Development Code, be waived and in lieu thereof the roof elevations shown on the accompanying grading plan, approved by the Edmonds Engineering Department, be established as the maximum allowable heights for any houses constructed on the respective lots". At the public hearing an exhibit was presented and admitted as exhibit #3. Exhibit #3 was interpreted by the Hearing Examiner as being the maximum height analysis for the houses within the Plat. In the exhibit the over heights and under heights dimensions of. the 25 foot requirement were submitted for the lots in the Plat. Lots 2, 6, and 7 were shown to exceed the 25 foot requirement. However in the September 151 1986 request the Applicant submitted that these heights were "for informational purposes only and were not intended as factors to be used for the determination of height controls" Accord- ing to the Applicant the correct height controls for the structures on the lots were set forht in exhibit 3 in a column entitled "Proposeci Mamimum Height". The figures in this column correspond to the roof elevations shown on the grading plan which was admitted as exhibit_. The record of this proceeding has been reviewed and the request of the Applicant is well taken. The purpose of his request was to provide views from new homes within the Plat while protecting existing views. With a review of the requirements of Section 21.40.030 the Applicant may accomplish this purpose. However the waiver should be allowed 0 ■ Amended Decision RE: V-24-86 Page 2 subject to the condition that the building heights do not exceed those listed in exhibit #3 in the "Proposed Maximum Height" column. This waiver is consistent with'the comprehensive plan of the City of Edmonds comprehensive plan, zoning code and the provisions of section 20.85.010. The criteria as set forth in section 20.85.010 are satisfied. Accordingly V-24-86 issued on September 9, 1996 is modified as follows: A variance is granted from the usual methods of establishing maximum building heights, as prescribed in section 21.04.030 E.C.D.C. for the Harbor View Estates (P-2-86). This variance is subject to the following conditions: 1.The heights of buildings constructed -on the lots of,P-2-86 shall not exceed the building heights as set forth in the Proposed Maximum Height dolumn of exhibit 3 of these proceedings. 2.All conditions, with the exception of Condition #2, of the September 9, 1986 decision shall apply to this variance. i Dated this day of Septmenber, 1986. n Tames M. Driscoll Hearing Examiner 0 R� F w ., �R ll.......✓,..tr-.=.:....sar.:,.:.�:-.w�4+;...�i:Y�,...n.4t�..eh,m�uid.,ba_ve:,�:iir.•.n.s....,,,�.Sw.rt.u... ra..iri'v..x ..e... .l.w..r.r.. r,.,, .mc..�:.. _ EXHIBIT CITY OF EDMONDS }TEARING EXA111INIER APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE APPLICANT j)arlene Landry FILES �P ._ � g( -( DATE Q FEE R1CT A P O' S HEARING DATE: ADDRESS 1.138 3 r d i-,ve CITY & ZIP Edmonds, vJa. 08020 PHONE 7 71-205l INDICATE TYPE OR DEGREE OF INTEREST IN PROPERTY 100 Ownership LOCATION OR ADDRESS OF PROPERTY Same as above LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY Lot 8, except west 100 ft. and except the north 33 ft., block 3 south park addition to Jdmonds -is per plot recorded in volume 8 of plats, on page 13, records of Snohomish County. VARIANCE REQUESTED: Front Yard Installation of satellite dish. FOR OFFICE USE ONLY: USE ZONE: ZONING ORDINANCE REQUIREMENT:GU2 Release/Hold Harmless Agreement The undersigned applicant, his heirs and assigns, in consideration for the City processing the application agrees to release, indemnify, defend and hold the City of Edmonds harmless from any and all damages and/or claims for damages, including reasonable attorneys' fees, arising from any action or inaction is based in whole or in part upon false, misleading or incomplete information furnished by the applicant, his agents or employees. Permission to Enter Subject Property The undersigned applicant grants his, her or its permission for public officials and the staff of the City of Edmonds to enter.the subject property for the purpose of inspection and posting att/ndant to t�i� application. Si'anature of Applicant, Wfter or Representative DARLENEiZANDRY 0 DECLAR.A.TIOi-N'S OF APPLICANT Please answer all questions 1. What are the physical characteristics, (i.e. topography, shape of lot, etc.) which create a hardship for you in regard to development of your property? Free obstructions both on owners property -and neighbors property prevent installation at any other location 2. How does your property differ from other property in the same vicinity? Does not, all property in this vicinity has large trees, which affects useful location of any satellite dish. 3. Will this variance be detrimental to the public or damaging to other property or improvements in the vicinity? No; this variance will not have a.ng detrimental effect on the property values _.nc:/or use of adjacent property. 4. What hardships will result to you if the variance is not granted? Will these hardships have been caused by your own action? No. I I will be unable to receive satelite transm.issionsxx and television reception and suffer a monetary loss of,,$3,500.00 Without a satellite dish, I can receive reception on two channels only and reception even on those two channels is "snowy". 5. Can you make reasonable use of your property without the variance? `"o. See answer to no. 4. Without satellite dish, I will have functionally no television reception, except for two channels that are "snowy". n r tt.� } r h rv✓- 4ax �r..;r �l, 7-1 . n �� .,.. n„A.aeuw1'Lxf�r sm' S3iv.'dtiYYkVS±ii.:Eida6ik;YJ1u11.tlFcYax{?3uiui.+�:ali,f.+.alA:�ubl.?rG xb:iSWu✓ii±pietireai�`u!-.4YkW:+..w+r+o:.'W.o..�Y,...vrt...y�.U.:...i)+eu»,..krn....w.s..w:.i.h�...n:.:a.tt,.......w..,..,-J:v::..,.,.�.u.....,:.�_..�.....r.,.:.� d pl- .. (x. EXHIBIT 3 o 301 �11� •Sv 5 E m ,lw�'P�`fNYRr:'�1�''.r�,...'"il ,ii-nvW-�`Y11.i'�k '--.'%7fi.F �r�tS ..... .. L' r.._.. _, i• Ij /1 r'.'+'i ..wl>"I r'tcf T .'7 IE� k ` • t9l U2 ; I (NAr _ r� I� VICINITY' MAP PINE EXHIBIT 4 0 (] b 60 I to l5 60 1 O [ It ' 20 a I f l �-r I I s (B) (A) 5-61 66 �I 23 V-30-8W W v�,f�,I zlo 2 74 - \ IL JI frr / \ 3 (A) (C) ^ u 1 _ `3 (8) S-23-65 tPj•' ai ✓ // loz 64.ea �•-..I J(A) �soZ , rlto s -- fktALI loz ID 6..1l c'- %S•28.80 rt, -;c 2 k20S Z IT 6 �llals) J 06.16 SFIR PL.; 40 32 7 M45 ® 102 S-24-79 (B) em _— —lkp`\ cs.k,r _ 15756 17I INN, i ` •rl 27: �•f•/ �� c D 16 E?a no 69 I i I it 9 1 132.47 0,3 �, u I _ - I I Ifs _(-� j3 15 19 CD 22.s '6 .I 1 I• � I i 120 �z '^ _ S-21 i 64 �I1 I iII II 14 r �O 54 2338(A :f Y.•!A :j 3 ;0 `Y) 90 L—M —� %V• f.Ik AlN4GC C43lmzwr. . fL.—, Li`. 453.5 13 12 :1 C Cl 153C M II 5 ri CO I N I 26014, 20 ' N'ORTH .ti PLa 'b 424.40 4zi 327.31 � '�----__ ,Y 9 N �` 10 A _ eE 1 N h i M a 7 7 0 WOODINVILLE HOME APPLIANCE, Inc. 483-8500 P.O. BOX 7, WOODINVILLE, WA 98072 October 29, 1986 17524 131ST N.E. X To Whom It May Concern: I, Larry Ashby, Lead Technician at Woodinville Home Appliance,Znca did ;the'"'mt,al site .c.hec.lc .end -_install- ation fob' Dar;lrene`; Landry At „the time, the location where we3*the only spot it would work, unless it was moved closer to Third South. Unless her neighbor to the South has removed or trimmed any trees, this is still the only spot on her property where she can receive satellite T.V. reception. Sincerely, ( dutl Larry A by 0 5? ,�'l��f, � ai. t a �. v r � tYp • .. x fit,';- i�"'ski;:,°t� .,r; ;:' :� s ,, ;`If '�c t _ ._—"ti., .:�a:' .s, �w� x .'xn+s} •?�•:YY1r�' +.4+61 i.:.�:a L� l�:E:'�e�iL'..tUu.�wi"�a�xi� f.w+.+.._i,.—._.. _...u�..us_u...�.a...,.�.... �1... �• • • m 3v+r 17 AOP Nt MdOf 1 U •. x j I ` I ,p l o t' o � � s � I it .................... :. . I LYJ1bHowes 20 1F31 Vidw Vibrative Instead (21vs1._...,.". ... _. _._ 07 [F4] ife,iMy Ea•rclw 22 [T31 Morning Report 12 IN King's lids dens• 16 IWS1Today - 19 [F41 HssdseuN aomkrp Mkkeyt 15 IS1lsun•hine Factory 21 [Fill Movie " "The Little to -Tell (enc) 02 [AD] sponsDask 0ulervu" (1951, Drama) Yvonne Latlno 06 [AD] VJ:J.D. Roberts Marsh, M•NIa Hunt. A young English .ek (am.) - 08 [AD]Body Moves (enc.) gd d,soms of bec«n:ng a pupa bslienna,(1 «., 1 raw,.) -31 ' Jimmy 09 [AD]Today (enc.) 4:15 A.M. . 10 LADI Good Morning America 06 IF33 Movie • "The Last Alum" dTommy (anc.) 1 (1940, Dame) J. Fallen MacDonald, ns ' • ' ' '.21 [AD] Yoga With Priscilla Pony Ann Young. A veteran Daemon Patrick (anc.) heads UP an env .Quad aealchl,p kapMng In The 23LAD1C66MDrminpN•wa(enc.) 1« s dang«ous pyromaniac who :s Intent on selling thecilyablun(1hr., 1»Macs. The ;02 [T1 I CBS Morning News 20 m(in�) : 21 IADI A.M,"tMr(erol. 10 IT11 Good MomkW America }•scA RA : U F Ua 11 W,s,ne - stay a,Y-.I 09 [Oil Nation's SualneasToday 11 [Gil 08 [F31 Superboolt 13 IGl l Event Of The Day 15 1101118bMght Talk (enc ) 23 [Gl I Fraggie Rook (ante) 01 IF31 Luce 02 [F31 Money Puzzle 03 [F31 Diane Dish 04 W318uakross Wamrup 17 [F31 Rkhord Simmons 02 [T31 Movie •• 'unco in The island Of Magic" (1964, Fantasy). (ante) 22IT31 Three 'Stoogea And Friends 151S11t•.op. . ' 12 WAIJ f ougn Ouestwns 19 IF41 Transformers 4:40 A.M. 23 (F31Movis II 03 (Gel solo 04 (GI I Donsdd Duck Presents 07 (Oil Daybreak (enc.) 10 [Gil Movie •• "Two in The Stone"(1963,Advantore) (er,c.) 11 [G11 08 [F311141ng House 17 [Ot l Lester sum.n Teaching 23 [Gel Movie " "Comfort And Joy' 0984, Cmwdy). (ante) 01 IF31 Bess a e•bastl•n 11 ti-JdnFrgunee 1 11 Lai 24 LF31 Barak house 13101 01 [T3lVIdocCot"Muek 15 [G1 02 (AD] PGA Go" Senl,o Much 17 (G1 Play Chw pionshp, final round, from 19 (GI Tucson, Ma. (RepaaU (2 Ms) Sutpan4 06 [AD]VJ:Christo •rWord 01 IF3 OB LADJ epida-Man jam) 02 IF3 18 [AD) NSW AdvwMes Of 03 [F3 Pk+occhk (ent) 21 [AD] American Ooetmment ' 17 IF3 survey(eno.) - 03IF41Go"Sin .h 22IV it '.._, 07 [F4lsomdf othingBesuul 08 [Al 12 IF41 Heorm•at . , — L '' 16 [AI 19 [F41ChanenpeofTha0uso% '- 21 IN t: 22INAnrFi vefnsT5:05_A.M. a 08 LF3J Denim ban Vlev ercas•In R0mP4r Room (anc ) Movie ••• "Jaws' (1975. tent) To day'. Spwiel Hayford surrafrkre Factory Elegant Appetites (arcs) Body Moves (am.) Toddy's Ispedal tern.) Jkranysvnggan (arc.) s•wllllsce 22 [F41 HTs sports Wks 5:35 A.M. 18 (GilSewnch•d 06 (F31 Movie • "kryash. . Goddess' 11934. DocumenlMy jungles of So,neo, an ew ses,ches for a mysterious goddess.lt tv..25mn.) 5:45 A.M. 11 [F1l ITN News -tondo Australia �. 11 • 02 [011Crook And Cho" 04 [G1 I You And Me, Kid 07 [G11 Day -a" (enc.) 09 [1311NISAToday " . fees we f•-nn _ _ ,may ,. .. _ . ' -..;.. ...... - .uz trio star AcCounwq .__... _ - .1 s.+u .........•.". - .. , (cc)02 LAD] .1:.'bnpop« 13 IF31 Movie •"Lilel«ca (1985, Aerobics 5:30 1 fir 9 [Fla s000byDw • , ! p : seat ,, ... . LF4]Aeten Beds 08 [AD] spiderr•Man(errc.) - 03 IF3l Royenaaard A•M. :Yt_ 1 •." .. "T1vee Comedy) ,.� .03 t air% Stance Fiction).(enf) Perry 14 L011 Movie •• "faWAt c 18 [Ail Ash 2g (arcs) �. ^ 04 LF31 BueM••speGAls 04 [Q11 Dumbo'a Cletus .., 21 [F4] Movie •• uftey.vA sense d 04 [F41 Movie '" 'Tne'li•ga OI —• l 4:30 A.M. :• �.,�. •.,. •�� �caGil • W -- ys mkV � (1984, ).(ens diode•, ■ men ie 1 (Gil wsggarl Ct�Ne.&Yaerold ;psrriey,r(tpoup' iu yaktwrkaONIr A r 03 [G1J M.Its.lt(CC) .;:. 21 (ADl Business Fn• (RopeM) ' 10 IF31 P.J. And The Preud•nM• Q1l M ••(once) a Md obtom, rye man Is ualad e«Ipbhthe ;Parblsrr girt •eta «d m a viporow '04 I01] Wakxnn• To Pooh last.) : � ::'.: • . sent lane.) 0 Bin• and eievalad to nobility. 21 [O1l to', wre • weutfr'I '...- r.. 07 [F4]P•ggy Denny .'••..., - ' 11 IF31vidw Dlae Jockey 9 [01]sD•rt•Canssr I! , ; for pad Cis. ..:_.:.t wr,pagn ; Cgm•y . , _.. .:AAGE,. rr. .. _. -alloolos' .. Ifit""' it DOE MrM 1s{(trade �`k f4 sees - j.r ' r• FMffRACWMRNUMBEA , :• , ... .. - -' ".;; ¢ SPACEN[S 1 120'W [S1] SATCOM 2R GALAXY 2 SATCOM 4 TELSTAR 302 WESTAR 3 GALAXY 3 TELSTAR 301 .WESTAR 4 ANIK D ANIKI 109•W MORELOS 1 113.5.1N [M1] WESTAR 5 122.5 W [W` 727W [F21 74V [G2] 83V [F41 87.5W [T2] 91•W [W31 93.5•W [G31 96•IN IT11 99•IN [W41 104.5 W [AD] Ii8] M�w!s .. ... °."C! sI°por,t"ese .. ABC lII r� I I I ed:rtsd i I I I i �I ( edss(E�t,I i I I I k�1 dles�a"dttrs I I ; I IDa�BCdbpnhestar on O fees m45hoDDirO NeLI2I mP.) I 09, I Ine!s�"Beds' ' T''b�•s.pINort�s kI I feeds Heartbeat Net ,„e.� i ohaale Amerieafl Eatasy (ark.) occazbnal ' I ! I III ! I III11 I I I I I I II ! , . i I I IPprk IIII I IIII 1 ABC N.Ttt n 1 '' sees ' ! (8C leads 3 _ 3 sWrtsAYLVI Reds I I •Wm ' I Onstlan Nit 1 I I I I w s I I I I i l !Wl s It�1 I I III II1wl I'I I I i I 4 I I .I�y! h!�� 1 I I I I ked�'I �� I LI ' Nklebdean lWes6 fe�I Dealt tacos • ^.'III Ieledi'I I I '' "'teed : s0orb leeds ' 's :::. •. , 5 ..: �. ,.• •: •:�'... ` .,. I i spots feeds I I I I i' I I I 1 1 1 I IIII I I I III CNN teed' ..sports teals dD I !Worts ABGTV N.Y. !erc.l I U311bedpws l It I� �111 ' 6 I i l l l l l l l i l � tw Nlghtkns tells elI spores Ids .ponds feeds 7 tees l Temp Liberty I ! I I I.. ICBS I �.. •.• feeds I I I (III (III Netwo I I PrCgiaw 1 CBC fells .:• spats feeds 1 I I Bmadcutlrlg' I I I news C•SPAN 11 o Unit) I Iiiiii casional I i i i' i i l l l l I I I !1!��"if'�"! I I i t IIMx °CdYI I I 6 IeI 11F1rs PIo Am'spons Nr I 11fJN Nkyhroece i t le s I U S. Senate feeds I le«h d'.)I t Pun PItPV farcI ) ~ III I feeds I I I revs. spoor lads I LShId ICnm i riuO«s! rims sports feeds Oe1 aN (arcs) :spots feeds 9 IeaM NetJBo esf At SWN001 Mons I IIIIII I I I I ABC NaMo« I es0 TI- i rE°ca�aI 111 �lie I I IIII..I. I IIII 1„0 I III -.I Amerkan Movie Clasvcs programs Wl ' spirts Iced, InpI!IMrworki I I wart adI s1 ChBC NdN, lPul .I, eppdS lie NI enI sdI rk (Iell, BI atIeBi teI " I Sp�Oland I "` ds` All �s lEas, I! ! I I I I I I I I I I I I I i l I I I I I' I I ,2 I I I I I i 11 III I l , occasw ai! Guvlen Sports _ fe I i w Eoccasional I 1 sports lass I I I f i t ' I f nswz,.epofl9leedsi ! JISO tads saws 6 WaD feeds sporti Ida 1a feeds .: l ;feeds) I sports feeds ! Sports Newark ! I I faedsi ! Coe ! pws Isoo s I l I I I I IJea aN! I I ,4 i i i! 1 11 ► I Ike �d%" I l l! 111 IIII ! I I! i l! feed•_ feeds! em)I l l l l sin showcase, Fk,rse Rackq (enr III CBS Naas ! f I Woeedt I ( pBSA .. .. CBCFrend� dpdrD lls ,S ACTS feeds i I IIII ! I' I to" IShap at Nome letdr I Iiltl�il I, CNN IIII ced�HbDue d Con '•' IIIllllllll ,6 !IIi�'�II I!G!t�e!IIIIrsi: CBB NeModt I � ! f ' l I I I I CBS feeds IIII leads' 'Illfrenchlll I j i sports feeds : i 11rOpnrfg IYksn I � .. _ • .. .. pepdional II ! III ' I alwrts i I ! � ! ! I , f8B Netwsxk I I fEEds I I I , OrWrsmt (Earn Mali. sports feeds ( I ISgf°I' I 'feeds ! gg pg Ci)C tads rda ,7 Sateste Showtlme �B��e�eiis W I I I : I l i l l l f l l Fkt Yoko USA !Horse BMWBMWlenc.l 1 1 sports feeds DICCasiOrRl feeds I l I I sperm leads Edmonton (arcs I I I 1!eeldtl I I I I pam 16 : I I Mill I I I I III 'gawp ! I BBC News ,• .' Stapllrp occasional I Wdf6 feeds h.s.5.68.8 red) CBS teed •. BonUMN feeds new I CBS News. CBS, NBC oceAoorul' lads I CBS darts CBC Nord)(AIII 19 Line feeds I I I Iotxsstonal I I kjebel (er news, sports feeds ] WPIX•N.Y. feedsRacing 1 1 I 1 1 Pnme Ticket SWrts I C8S fetwork f i l worts CON 1 IEufl f I news, spode loads- 1 Horse Radng lance) l i! I Montreal I I I I I I I I I I I I I 20 1 its leedS Beds taoprannn ', WNSPB$ wry. I I f ' I : II Netcom Horse Pic" I . I Nehom �f", PBS C Debt ark. 2, BTN arcs news feeds I IIII !IiII 11 f I I l I I l l! i I fan &Qadcasnr IIII l , NmnI9O Channel feeds: starts teeds lent.) ! f• I CHAN f I CBS News oaasnoall Amkd Forces Sat. Not. 1 I i l feeds I sports lads I :!' I news, sports feeds i Varrcprrser B.C, ens. I f I 22 I 'Scrambling Inb. c 2 (AFRTS) Fome team Seats sporD teens P85 WJBKL85 IIII f New Erq. Silts. rn. '] .__.•pats feeds Tiro Simi Nsrw rat I CBS feeds _I soars fled% r .._._.__.... _ - _._.______'_ f ! Wdld Saleste Nd. news. sports beds Behest arc. 23 % . . . worts felts _ lit -I week Pacific Pacific CsaifffiiyMFweck) '- ... (I for, Zt mn) 24 [Gil MickeyMouse Club 16 [AD) Toles Of The wlA curnbs Io lrue toys 07[Gil "Inea• Day (ena) 12 F41 Tough Ouaallona 17[F31 it Figures 11[Gil 08 IF3]G•nd•sen 22[Fill ItTS Spats Wine ... 01(om) 09IG11N•don••BuskassToday 19 [F4lTurrslermen 24IF33bleakHous• : 1 j 13 [Gl]vI•w•rGa•kl 01 [F3lPnwMe1 •Ertwdse, :. 5:35 A.M. 02 [F3]Aak Ws•hb w . 19 [ADIFMP•nf•rs Pla< '. Odsr _,,, ,,,; 11 IG1108 EF31 Superbook- 440 A.M. 01[T31Vks•ocounWMualo ( 15 I/O1l Ronq•r Room(am) 18 I01l SewRch•dr. 21[AD] educational Pm +-<a 13 [G1] event Of The Day 23 [F33Alovt• 02 [AD] PGA Go" Seiko Match 1 17 IGi I Household! SaM•tlon06 _ 03 IF31irsiM ddfW. (�,) , .-... , ,'• .., qr ...-. Pay CfwrVionship, final round. Iran 19 [Gil Movie ••• "Jaws' (1975. P3], (IB31NDocunantuylJto U,e 04 [F31 FHN Mooring N•ws .. 22 AD; Romper Room ar,: `"Thee. Little 15 [Gil StnghtTad lencJ Tucson, Ariz. (Repe•q(2M•) Suspa,se).(a,o.) - pram•)' Yvav,e ;23 IG1 l Frwgle Rock t 11 06[AD] VJ:ChdstoPhw Ward' { semuch d 9orrao, to expedition 09 [F3l Good MonJng Wodd 23 [AD] Fantasy latsnd (or. 'not.Ayouq English �. 01 IF31 La•W ''i ,. 08 LAD1spa«•Mrt lu+c•).;:.':1 I 'Ot IF31 TatsY•dpeetsl sear sss.iay..•5min.) mysterious white 10 [F3l Fa•d•T•ts Tnearn lent.) 15 [W4l s.a.m. Stmt(Rw 000an+w lei s 03 [Oil ., I r..„02IF31¢nt•rprl..uS.A. po0tla.. _� 5:45 A.M t . 10 [T2lABC H.we(CC) m)ar t<.•)tt.. 02IF31Mon•yPuuM .,Sr, 04IG1lIxnaldWfckPna•nts.=18[ADI faev Adv.mui.• of 03IF3lJackHayfad •'� 17IF3IFamlly 1 .�h[i; twla,,i., �l' 03 IF31 Dian• W h 4 T *: 07 IG11 o•Yb!•ak (enc.) t ). pktotthlo lent.) , r r }�.,y t � 17 LF3l ca,pLe ".11 IF11 firm Nws•Lmrden To 124 W3l One Sy On. 16 IT2l CSa Neva A.�04 IF31Su•kieu"W■ 21 [AD) Arnsrki" 0owmin"t 1• .22 [T3]SmaN'Adventunh ', Awtnka . r .••,>.•� - 02 IT31 Movie ••A Soldier "03 IF4l We An Ong FeneO MacDonald, 17 LF31 Rldt•M tlkrtnwn• .w� .10 [Gil Mod• ..•'07ins to The Ivey (mtc) ; a I s �`Q LI_`� . 1 1 Story"(1964, Ganab(•nc-) 7.1 04 F41' Aelv.nk... Of A Yetaan !woman starve"(1t1aT, Adwnlue). lent.): 03 IF41 Gd.p.IeM ;�I�,�S' \, .. 15 [31]Sra+.hkwa F.etay '. S••uty ' n ��. •ery 02 IT31 Movies ..••. •'llnico In The 11 [G1l 08 IF31 Flykq House' •� Y �a .Six, 22 [T3l My utw Part N• FMnde Se•uiW ,aJ ri„ 18[AD] Body 02 LG11 Gook And Chow 16 LWSl Dor,•nw ._tr,.• 08 [F4l A•It Waefrksptm pyromeaec who I• ts Of Ntsp,c'�l;9Bs F•nWyl•' .02 F411Ieasbeat iti*.ir. '..18 [AD] Body Mow• (era.) r .07 IF41 Gary Mndaa 17 [01]wt.r MfraaaT•adtkfg" `� a Sty adaza.(I M.. ( ) .c.a- f•;, - 3 04 IG1l You And Msr Kid _ 15 LSll Word of lN•,. r1al ^ 22IT31 Thee sloop.• And 23 [Cat] k1ovN' "Comfort And .19INCheaeng•OfTheGoSob 21 UD1Tod•yep.Nal (ea.) 07IG1]Daywetch (ant) `" 19 [F4lMurot•re aNi1Nr (ens) Friends 5. vy.i �k 7. :. 01 IF311"llir ly)•(ena)y;f l:. r...; 5:05 A.M.-:W:j4f'1r , '.. 22[AD] Awn eva9wn(enc.) .,,r n .04 [MI Mooring lNv�.,,. 8 15 [Silcep. ^r I e . Ot IF31SeaeaSebaet4n j qt 09 I01lNSAToaq 08 [AD] Good Momkq Waked 6.05''A.M. A M +... .. . 02IF3lPAndpM•olAotountkw '.18IG1LDnamofJearwde"l.i 03IF41s«r.tptsc• i?i 11 [Gil 08 (F3lFstharKriov lenal r•,v ,. ,![ ,, :Iw 18 [Gil DownTOEarth 02 [AD]Air b 'I r 5:30. A M a:jaT 1 F418coobyDoet it:: Seat ': • •:.,,•-:,— • .., .. .... A.M.-' Lfelgte" (i9B5, r • -.• c0 . , _ .... .. 09 [AD] p fir This (Rei 9I yte)' ti�•:t.. OB[ADlspldabM•n(ene)i "� 03IF31RoySa++and.rca�t ., i -tSTt - 6:10 A. 04 IG1J Dranbo ■Ckcue 21 IN me "TMell Perry 14 [Gil MovN •• "tight a The (enc.l AMryt; -" 18[ADl F&hh20(ane) ," 04 IF3lSwYi••e af�d�1•, .• 05 IG11 me Harnteoner AM Hikkag(t KM„srAan&ov�« w., .. `. 13 IF3]on. Teo Many lent ,{ coral"(19B4, Sdaroce Fiction) (enc.) 10 [AD] Keay And comps y ctt +s - .21 [AD] Ou•Yt•u fW (ReWU 10 IF31 P.J. AndTM preaWnl'a .ItiSe (1981 CornedY) lent) '; madixty lecba, • roan M puaaad 17 IG11 JYnmY Swepp•rt .. (enc.l fi:i$ A.M. . To Penh '.(artc•I':• :;.':4r c.' c ,�1+ iiF ]va.olii.tJotkeyi fl 09 Gil . - ) for post sins and elevated tonobility. 21 [Gl]Cafllope, .. 141ADISonfolfrmadrr(er,c)r .19LAD1FrlerrdlyrwM ,um rcft.v '07[F4I P*M D•^v 1p .r.l ...._.. "Pin K't. e h r ;, .. A �.. 0 satel it , .. ... .: T 1 ,. !.WESTAH ELSTAi T125 ASCA 4, ANIK D ANIK{ MORELOS 1 :STAR 302 WESTAR 3 . GALAXY 3 TELSTAR 301 .: [AD] .109 W ]B] 113 5IN [Mi] 1YOCW S ] 122E5 W [W5] W [T3]3 128 W [A1] 131 WMF3] 1 [T2] ' 91•Vil [W3] ., • 93 5 W [G31 96V [T1] 99 W [W4] 104.5'W „5•W ,� 1 ` L«"w . r. W. , . st I I l i I , .. ' a7 L— .. ".' . r"" ° 1 •'spots feeds Sdgh6far I �t 3.5.505.7E 1 s ( Ifaedsl 'CNN IL L I I I I I I I >a7ip11 I I I I I I apodsl CNN I I I I I I University, lie I I I 11 SekeN (enc.l IIIIIIIIIIII 1Wnal�Sttopl>iMNet. 2 I JI 18S Netrorlc " `. I I I 5 Nttrrakl Ma O CWl 2 I I I feeds I Gc Gene Sco� y• �... ,r , '.. -, : DrolOrarrb (East) sdol5 tams, TNe .I 8 I IJCN I Independeaf 3 sportslWLN feeds .IIII I _ _ '� I I I IABC I A CNN`_ Hill 1d1 - = feeds .'. _ 1 I I ep " • ,. I fie vaWM LBL I I I i I I I I I I I CNN teed sports ferd+ Sd sEp I I �nIbI I I ABGIIIII N N.Y. lds I IC gorts $le._ds i(enc.1 I : eId tn �w! I I I I I I I I I I Inews 7 slnrts feeds I I I I •' °• (7 5i56.3 78 ndl ' feeds 11 Palma (Eafl I I r ... L'BC feeds' spoor fro spoor tells I%°Am SWns Net I I I I I I III I I I I I I I I I HarNxCoo enc.)I I`I I I I Ateieo GNI I I 8 IIIoccasional Is%nheedt ( I I I I 'INN Nkws leads I flsys. sppts tells III. I I L,,,, alhorY I Nr .. feces)I , .,. I I I I III - IaaM ` . ' I, I I" i,n feeds I I I Ipl .rW1 I I IiI. I I eeds eII wGdsTO• so"feeds etroit (eInCI Detroit.)I on spII nd1 (Shz'5 uErWra�tI tetdY 48C No • 1"I ram (Eun Ip rn la II II (I I h ' I 111102 II II II II I I I II II Ii iI Ii II II II I I II I •I; II I II II iI lent) Is. o9nms MTV t ,n , oc III lllH"tal I i l � 4 . :, sports ed i l I I I , sptleads C SNO(Pic. 3DOrtSIR SaterlitsNarwork (am.) •fee yE G I (`iI I _.laws, Ll AM Newark "u °R I I I I ILII I I I I N7RksQ s programs (Easel nn (q I .,. news a GaoaN Sports '4 I I I I I I i I i - IIiBO Iael) sports feeds IIIl Will nwSoe 5fed SDs feed sportIA 13 sports feeds I I N (I I IIIIII CaHdeeMYoJrkue M East - IIII ! I I I I I I I TLN i I I I I 14 I I I I I , I I I yfw'Cs&SI I I C.a.rvtaalicatlprb I I I I I I I I I I fed I rsports sod motal (and.I 1I Mexico GN i. I feeds lelldsoos 5° Radfeeds •1 I I I I I I I I I I I al s�iedt 6 S.7. C09 News I ; I I mhe" fells I i ps5•A CBGFrakn starts its ACTS I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I,pma Slapdrtp NIL 2 liedsl I i I I i I I I I CNN CBC) Hotns� mm'nl I tfi I 91N news' 1 I I I I I I Caribbean Su ttort I I NTN Plm (ss B S rrw) '�S NeMwtt t I CBS feeds feeds rn Wane MINI) 1 1 VbnewslLondon actaaansl IIIIII !IIII I I I UfItlI CBS Network , 1 I I sports fe lls I, I 1 feeds i PBSB C9C lean sports Ir _ 17 S•Mllle SMwtlme feeds I (III oprams (East) news. I' coy i I I I W' III Horse WHV lane.) I oassonal I I I I yNtl span feeds Edmmton (one.) spats reads 18 I ; I Nersp Reoen Videotezt CBS lead' ! I span leem Mods Stappnp ocasiatal I„ I I i i i I I I i 1 I 1, CBS News. I I CBS, NBC I omr+>til ganev,sMTN Ieem (8S span CBC Norm IAd.I 19 line leads I Nkather LTarval I 'fails I I , I Taws, span feeds feeds leads CBf.IT ' a:caWaal Tekeet RA,arq (enc.l ABC. NBC. LBS . . BET roc u..._... I' news. soots _ SPECIFICATIONS SIZE: 10' F/D:.375 OPERATING FREQUENCY: 3.7 TO 4.2 GHZ MIDBAND GAIN: 40.1 DBI� FOCAL LENGTH: 443/4" FEED TYPE: PRIME FOCUS 5 YR. WARRANTY MECHANICAL SPECIFICATIONS 18 SECTIONS FOR TRUE PARABOLIC SHAPE TRIPLE ZINC AND CHROMATE BEARINGS WITH GREASE FITTINGS ALL HOLES PRECISION STAMPED BY DIES SINGLE POST MOUNT 4" O.D. PERIMETER RINGS HAVE TRUE PARABOLIC SHAPE PRE PUNCHED PERIMETER RINGS FOR (OPTIONAL) GUY WIRE KIT (DUAL FEED INSTALLATIONS) UL GROMMET FOR FEED HORN TUBE DESIGN FEATURES ANTENNA IS DESIGNED FOR FAST, ECONOMICAL INSTALLATION, CAP ON TOP OF RIB SECURES MESH (NO CLIP OR POP RIVETS). DECLINATION ANGLE CAN EASILY BE SET WITH ANTENNA COMPLETELY ASSEMBLED ON POLE. SPECIALLY DESIGNED SCREW IN FEED HORN FOR FAST ASSEMBLY. SERVICING OF ANTENNA IN FIELD FOR DAMAGED PANEL CAN BE ACCOMPLISHED WITHOUT DISASSEMBLING ANTENNA. FEED HORN COVER INCLUDED (PACKED WITH ANTENNA) POWDER COATED MESH SHIPPING SPECIFICATIONS U.P.S. SHIPPABLE WEIGHT 135/1-13S. 1 CARTON 63" X 14" X 6"-3.06 CU. FT.-65/LBS. 1 CARTON 26" X 14" X 26"-5.47 CU. FT. 70/LBS. 792 EAST 93rd STREET, BROOKLYN, N.Y. 11236 (718) 346-1200 w . Ll " y7 1>)r F..W.!J+ v 1 ,� 1r •} •. /� , f I.. <_:. ?tit 'j e' 461f' r }Y�' d , ;�s�� r}} t�t +f � k1 • -, •' 1 V .3_� t r . w(a i + �yuu.uk?' rt \A: VaJ 1 ;I �'i -' .. ,avrnww .r.�l��l� tt >, .> : srsr•ri� Tn+� ��'�y.. "L�4'. F r '' i ilC t*7y,. jLyY-'yVar-.JJ tt �+} 4"r ,t /C✓'Fit 1 t' ty F -� ... t.- Iy {g+ .t{nk'jV+'•;1t • vT L s ^r{ f 1 k>4S{fyr5 ry }{1 T7, S 6 t {. •:�. }�ti. i t 1�,. rei t7.: i i 2 .rt t F N�.�dT� } r it t j' t •, F xa..� L 4r . . .r , �, . v. ;; a• ' �i } } ) y y, _ .� ' �F}r°" ,yj ' R f •N 4v i�i: • v� t. I i "'t`4it41/t iSS,. t {+ J L f •Y�'}v.. Wit"r,f � Or ;i •^�'Sr � 4O',r•sjt • f rry+t"^y�.rYftl.Y st.r r r L •r(Y, �,r >% i•.y[.,Y�l �_ .. 1 Y ~.. 41T... . , 11 YML f)) LF'�y J 4�. �S .• .1. k!' %'� i Ytf .,i. •.V �:T' }..,.'S: '• •t rr.' rl f'�r - 1, p ,' Tt�� .-� y dt - IC'',`,t,..E 'tr �t'A-`y'r�ty,� y ,�sw• 1'�"C q.�r•.) r�y ritnr 1 �• w ,.. .\ t i'y ..ti .•r Y.: y' s •ny .if r f '"I ` f.. 4 FFr t 'j i .�p' .L'+ryl rY -.Kt) r {Yt.i 21 t (v, i -� Y.LC ! I .A '.� Y £ A �Lt'%`._:•"'rk :'L �~*t ( ^'+.i A, 1'i"•C 1�3t ti 1.3`L;751:L. , T.. ,1 1.• y "' K.y a l .,.,,1� r E` .7 �J t,� 4' i lS>rv�ry 5 1 ! 4rj'.Y C 4i,! r.4 { '�f � tll.� *i r✓ta ra. S 'rk �y., r34 • ��..y 7)f�. 1t S7. A 1. J'(•t4a rt.'s l>Fr'nfSr; F/i 0tlt. yfi,.iyr aF L, ._:^•\ t.irr � -,s tr :`�Jf r. ii{ �♦�/ a . 'r {'r. rfr j J��.. R `4 Fr e./r �jl� �:_,: tYlx/j'' �, 2 tY`A�1t )Gq;' i.{.� 1,i i{. ,1 rY ��"yy( hi, `F�FiJ'r C1 t t r�7�V:/. i�'•t l�Y:�lS.i j (+' `�}t! "L kt �i r I iil•!hWl�. rxy, I'1tYS•aiv+ r1 '4yS t .y ,r Ar, rya J 1 ♦Ip~{•{{ffi t(� `.tt Y'wv al•F�f t S • C. y..,,. ��� ! 4 IrS r, t i I IJ xi (t 1 9 I ww� i • - IInM �{ r } ttt'r Jt' 'Yh MZ(y:\`�� { t.+ t t ;l''r �F I�t;, a , \y 4'`Ilj (•t.. .� .; `�� t yy. � '(•t`ik; i,��i ir} �ar}•W��{' i W.:. r fy . y lr ! f � SI r. � +{ �� f �YYY�;, hi „L► • i` vt'� j ,y. p r Y tr� y� ^i t Yr r`,� •. $ -•'''� h {1� \Fi�iF'�'r r j�{+•l'�# ��� �r t�r� �9 ,i `t rr i''Y'L 1t i� f �Ii iy V•f 11 i jt.A � • y ryyy�,,, r r i vI r.1 Z.. [� .,� r f M `,_ •t ,tt2�t{'A 1 -s f j it r F i l }In �y,¢;�j,I t'{{ I' r i A ♦♦F Yakr I.. 1- i {� ,I'tla�'r>t i! t � v,,,. i + ^�'` S`:^.�1. ��� ��S1L�77SS�d4'S .'`M { r. r1 Zi �}!� Y ��1 ,r{' �S Y>�� A+� `�. :+ ! � ,,: i♦ nr. � l'�tj b'l pt �.'t S 4{ a rkt '.e. v j ftt:TA � 4I is h 54 3tr� � lF Y +."�i:: ��je(.i,"ei �j � � �` 4t4t'�•F' b• i 1�', t� i F r5 ./ ,F Mt'�I,��a%f �. ♦'�`:,�Y•1i�^°'}.i� r'�j.ri ,I,1 +i{'� � 'V �` i %W >x r Y•+k r jt • t 7Fh•! i 3aS ,x,f J- �'1 "Y v 4 Ji,.y� . �t.rk.�: F ' J G TV , �• ••..'/ jay:. }ham "tit � f Sl •�� t?�t_�r�� ♦ ,tt• p* +f � ,j r.:� ... ♦ .7 %t �'14 i•r1>♦ r: T� _..f'..Yr.etl± _ _ SPECIFICATIONS SIZE: 10' F/D:.375 OPERATING FREQUENCY: 3.7 TO 4.2 GHZ MIDBAND GAIN: 40.1 DBI� FOCAL LENGTH: 443/4" FEED TYPE: PRIME FOCUS 5 YR. WARRANTY MECHANICAL SPECIFICATIONS 18 SECTIONS FOR TRUE PARABOLIC SHAPE TRIPLE ZINC AND CHROMATE BEARINGS WITH GREASE FITTINGS ALL HOLES PRECISION STAMPED BY DIES SINGLE POST MOUNT 4" O.D. PERIMETER RINGS HAVE TRUE PARABOLIC SHAPE PRE PUNCHED PERIMETER RINGS FOR (OPTIONAL) GUY WIRE KIT (DUAL FEED INSTALLATIONS) UL GROMMET FOR FEED HORN TUBE DESIGN FEATURES ANTENNA IS DESIGNED FOR FAST, ECONOMICAL INSTALLATION, CAP ON TOP OF RIB SECURES MESH (NO CLIP OR POP RIVETS). DECLINATION ANGLE CAN EASILY BE SET WITH ANTENNA COMPLETELY ASSEMBLED ON POLE. SPECIALLY DESIGNED SCREW IN FEED HORN FOR FAST ASSEMBLY. SERVICING OF ANTENNA IN FIELD FOR DAMAGED PANEL CAN BE ACCOMPLISHED WITHOUT DISASSEMBLING ANTENNA. FEED HORN COVER INCLUDED (PACKED WITH ANTENNA) POWDER COATED MESH SHIPPING SPECIFICATIONS U.P.S. SHIPPABLE WEIGHT 135/LBS. 1 CARTON 63" X 14" X 6"-3.06 CU. FT.-65/LBS. 1 CARTON 26" X 14 X 26"-5.47 CU. FT.-70/LBS. 792 EAST 93rd STREET, BROOKLYN, N.Y. 11236 (718) 346-1200 F ...� t 0 torl Flab.M.:'e'±xlf✓wT✓itwJL'L.4.h.-.JaL:w.i.e.eu.ive:isriYli,+sLS.ww...V,:..iL..a:u...+•.11 I Or Or rr�'31'�. rl...e...r..�: _.a r,« ... ..�,... �.,.. ..... .. _.. .. .... �.. _w.. ., ,r_.:.... ._ �� F ( RE4CEIVED ENGINEERING City of Edmonds ..Gary' McComas, - Fixe M.. Bobby Mills - P*4woo. INTER -OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE vDan Smith./Jerry HautIo - p tip O Engineering rTO FROM Duane Bowman DATE 10/1 /86 ..'.SUBJECT dopI1f1, I,IIt V O 86 VARIANCE.,TO'AL'LOW LOCATION 'OF SATELLITE DISH ANTENNA IN FRONT YARD OF RESIDENCE'AT•1138-3RD AVENUE S: r. '. y 1. HEARING DATE NOVEMBER` 6, 1986 PLEASE RESPOND'•WITH •YOUR_COMMENI •NO' LATER' THAN OCTOBER' 153 1986. 4F4 THANKS. .. YLiL. r r 'j a :i -. J 1 ♦ .i { torri OrII 1 / f h rI O .. .t Ir • O .,•la f i/ii y r '1 11 1/ 1 IL.p 'j} 1 r: .{ t rY ( /,F lY -.> Y l,a 1 1 r x Y' L 1{C 1(11 x c f 1 1 1 r �,_ I '. 4 F 41 t r I.a '`ip 1 R+ rlr i'1}rl}�'Vn�l !.,,, a<1 1'� r .*f 1 t at 1 .•xi�r� 5 h s ' .1..'.ri, rt a 1 y r�.w— •.�)L'r IY Ix }r F� iT! F4 '{n1li4�lgYrl�wl..Z l.x r J iyyll .7,tl {7 ti. �. 1r �1 Y �, ..4 i/ G d•;;}.. JI '14 t 4lrrl <.'J 6A. Y l c A nF l u' S '1 '1 1 �` 1.. . a i , C.,r x r. ; = r �3 l .L 7. ,/,A r S ff I. .f,:a {l'�r t",�Fil R5 3} 'K F i is r c 1 1 '.t t - ty 1 1 1 {-r r`2 w xJ'' •. L �t aJ Aa'rr JL.n 1 ♦L 5 `' j'Y� i r - f i { AL/•. ! K'. . J }•y}[ .t �r Ilr a5Y 1. .r I ! l IL, "i rpp r-O )til A /.�. Iu{ �r !J >< / :i.; e y •w i If 1 } YA i dY M' YJ / Y Y / } 1'/1 {n^ �i Q\t,,.N ?p! Y e YI Ft 2 7`JfY i L j 1 .\ r 1f`tl a L1, N:Y 1�1 ter. .. .... / 1 1 1 t :1 _. _ .. r 1 r r tri �' .e ntr! tf.f r� :1 L i L t I p YY f. Yr Y 1 1 L ' 1 r t• .�, 1 i op, op Or Y of r �• 'r. • food y { •4.e�Mr,...t. r. �`: .. �' •,+>16 ..i, .�'pK ..� .Y c.. {r.nt >J!• :) �.h �.. i . rl, .n. .F.., .. _m 1.J( a .,h, ,.:. •..y .A4.... Yl.\_ •i.'�1'd( 1 .. �' 1'r .' .`:. J .. • RECEIVED 0 C T 11986 EDMONDS FIRE DEy, ""'-- i,r; City Of Edmonds ,:=,;:;Gary McComas• Fire M., Bobby' Mills P.W.• INTER -OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE -.Dan :Smi.tb./�e.rry Hauth. - Engineering r,{ To FROM Duane Bowman DATE 10/1 /86 J" SUBJECT 'y; I1 , V 30 86 VARIANCE TO�ALLOW LOCATION OF SATELLITE DISH ANTENNA IN FRONT YARD OF'RESIDENCE 'AT:1138-3RD•AVENUE- S. ('RS-6). HEARING -DATE :• '�NOVEMBER' 6, 1986 P.• PLEASE RESPOND WITH YOUR COMMENTS NO'LATER THAN•OCTOBER 15, 1986 wIt c,` THANKS } J , rI t . tr , „PP ' (P. r < r r fi It t r�S�Y¢ ,.hrY 161 1�10 a�� LJy `I f � t i'{• a PI 1. J 0 5 I y .: i i„ P. 1 3 �y S,t t $ jR-e1L a h.rt 1 Cf}� r (t Lt PP '` p�t t ) 4.41 PI , }. fvio r G+l ' 1}° V Ii� a )�r�'. f ♦ 11 Al) ! 4 �t.. 1 e ` ..! J ,.. { r } n l if { }u� A i .PO t J , •l t 5,' f 1{'A try P. it} i' n, 'r' .ri I l 'J •� , rl,la !r r !}` t r'J�'+)'•1r fl }rvit ItiJt f!{t'V rt) •\ , y r>Y If NY\ 'l1I in,qP Rrif v�Ji �1M y }: (. Jl 1 i :1 } t, ,4: i5...V.�7*it .;r r C i•,a IrfV i{r '� '. lr, '.r 7j1 V ^• a , r r Fti N d tii ,t r , l ,. l i , J 4 ,T'S n r r F-. r r,c f i - .r, n , ,: i �! it ,f a �fJ, , .{ It L.IOi H. A� -ll�Jt r'' S ! 1 y V y 4 S k ?tA f q y, V .t 7 i +• i ' 1 4'.. . 1vCn nal l �•? tZ a{ R•1r y r.r Y. 1... }.!Y 1}',-r nr ` i 11 'l tt 1: ryl.%. J {ir li. :� ..i'..iv . a:r�.:.{'. [I if«.5, �t}r1 i,{.1 ><.t r,)�.. 1n'i Q' S�i�)r .ittrviry t{ .•l::tYt4A !.-1. 'ipq }�'1 it't % ,. ?,LIf '; a - %L Ir L� /AA 7 V t{,t o- ,'qy. �v }•h.r..ppk.4' f er i - .i'(l. r l.v, • •� �' > ..ti 2 r 5 t : yw i 'i' �' I +}rate[ rpF.Q.t ' L v JT: `i�r. )� {.. •T� t , , l . y1• '� i ,i ;'_ , -.'... 5+.1, rt. ;,.r r .�� i = .r•iM S ! �. "' S r. ry J i1 it"")' t Irf ),i++n 1 V. }, r a . ' �1F,i 1`\J{� 0..1 t f' , , ,' i s - rt', y. r i aJ, >. [ 1 wl.•'r� }fi>`V rA` y� ;r. ! r?f," 13.+, iy �,'h%I •r� 1 nL„f: i 111Y , , ': '. .. q '.>. •r� r:: r t I , �� r ` N 1Ti7 t 'i tiYl c { j�'tc 71 '.1 .E ; , c r.} r 't - f ' .. r r 1 , tr , J� i' , 7> C�„1; 1 r s , er ' . S n �t r -. .5 .. �. i 1 Y P..f . th i t , r 44 .;li. { 1i. il4r , 1 'h.i1 Y+Ir S;PPVf '1 `. a t• 1, V 7C r •r si , r t wi it r 1 Ili t r ..1l If It}�' 1, r J v.[ tt r ! Ir-S• 1 r'; L 1 try , ♦{� Oak • 6 a G VAc:� P s �\ ' \i 3 0 �� (o POP 1 OCT 031986 CITY OF EDMONQ$City of Edmonds Garry Mccomas. - Fire M. 1 1ob.by Mills INTER -OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE Dan Smithjoe.rry Hauth. - Engineering TO' FROM Duane Bowman DATE 10/1 /86 SUBJECT V VARIANCE'TO ALLOW'LOCATION•OF SATELLITE DISH ANTENNA IN FRONT 30 86, YARD OF'RESIDENCE V 1138-3RD'AVENUE S. (RS-6) HEARING -DATE:* . NOVEMBER6, 1986 2YY1 { PLEASE RESPGND WITH YOUR COMMENTS NO'LATER THAN OCTOBER 15, 1986. r by t. ' { h t ) 4 ie Mr � •F4j t f '.: :� - >• r r i � + THANKS . ppe�r ! !:, I4}},,} >fl✓':TPi, IFy� 1'k se jti tt Fa r 11 + :•� .S 5, y/ ^SLfTi r� rr �j 4 .r'y ttD ILf '?•A alt a r a J ,y ' yt+ 1)tt' i t f r.rii � rsii+t "y +illtir,n � 1 t� y ♦ll�ryj r y` ftcl.'Yp 1, s Inri TJ 1 i ,tt apaf tt c'./ +tji r t •' Jff� i('..% / I�'. k-+. i(,•qJ� rM• g;if�tr L' 4fr; +}*a „5 �tk', J. t r, {r�.+/�. , i.. 7•t t'f i.� r 1 /�J ".�.L/, {lr Upp.. �i-S.J �r �%f t h !i M� 1\ f t : r' t 1 j i V.` ♦ ♦ )t t Iu�l{ 1 lit h� 15�~J1 !�, ft �i4 Jl. t'��'u1 !t':e7' + �`it j '� }I% • 1 pp Lit;•'94"'� i♦ +�rpa=9'. .yh� „ttry4y t •r. ri,7�%'. r{r'+ sCf�t 14517,fy )i.i 1`1'f'jt •tan }F� Y try}, S l r 2 1 �:K•L.Y7 '�tF�J YJ'r�(1 4�r '� i P �'Qj I�....nf',+jp) r . w•�+i "1�5� c ti11.ua � r a1�1: <<,. I t4t/r yalr L � j 1 sj 5 c t':l�yc c f 7..tt�f J � .. Y .:, �' 1 .•:, 1 1 It•i�a. a r i � { ..1 p , T ' j•,y r ., Tlr y , : �irS.y� i^R''V Jc fGC.' •t -.)t y.-i 3 M<ei ; rri f{ � n."9 f +.7Qt tip i? l + 1 1 �,• 1 I t s Y<tf i to �� r.4.+ 4, i/ T ,v) r 7 t r t iY ......A Y51 ATTENTION: DUANE BOWMAN SUPPLEMENT TO ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER LIST CITY OF EDMONDS HEARING EXAMINER APLICATION FOR VARIANCE FILE # V-3086 DATE HEARING DATE KLt,I-_1dkD OCT 1 �.1986 CITY OF EDMONDS APPLICANT: Darlene Landry ADDRESS: 1138 3rd Avenue South, CITY & ZIP: Edmonds, WA 98020 PHONE: 771-2051 The following is a supplement to the ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER LIST filed with the Application of Darlene Landry to the City of Edmonds Hearing Examiner for variance on September 29, 1986. This Supplement is provided to disclose the names of the neighboring property owners which were unknown at the time of the original application. TERRY SMITH 1139 3rd Avenue South Edmonds, Washington 98020 K ARL H . REI NHOL Z 1142 3rd Avenue South Edmonds, Washington 98020 DATED this 6th day of October, 1986. ELAINE G. DuCHARME Attorney for Darlene Landry, Applicant a.: x� � ..�- . „r ''a.a: iivri.. , .. .' 1 .Kn u :> r. ,.. ..;1 � 1 r £ z y ; .i•M. ..„, s -5 . ' .. I ?'.. • ' 4 'F: .rt .,....; aL aa+5.y5 h- i 1 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER LIST PLEASE LIST ALL STREET ADDRESSES OF RESIDENTS OF PROPERTY WITHIN 80 FEET OF THE PROPERTY LINES OF THE SITE, ALSO LIST NAMES AND MAILING ADDRESSES OF OWNERS OF THESE SAME PROPERTIES, (THIS INFORMATION MAY BE OBTAINED FROM THE COUNTY ASSESSOR'S OFFICE, IF A BANK IS LISTED AS OWNER, PLEASE INCLUDE LOAN NUMBER NEXT TO INDIVIDUAL'S NAME,) Martin Spadafora. 11.36 3rd Ave. So. F,dmonds, Wa 98020 1139 3rd Avenue South Edmonds, V7A 98020 w:\� SuWQ(,-.v Y\arnt 1142 3rd Avenue South Edmonds, WA 98020 iNe J�, F h ` ;p1�.�',t• 5A 2q�{{-��M.�s.O J�,a",G' 1 e-,'.`TU.74✓ { � `', Aa ; .. �sH' .�,uxl k:"� f, witin4i 1}"i€s"i !,.a'.}4k�',�/rIbt y? t `v r `�N�e�1dY.M �. F 1. s4• � '5���j,�jd'i:iiCStas emu.• ..-"�i:�Iisbu'."aS.w7�>L'.w>�'+'ixanHha...,'.i<,.:wleahJas.w:.�"-,.�wr...S..u_i..:Jei......+..:.a3._.,uxaat......uL ... ., .r,. ....5.d,.,-Ul�,y _._ }`.: (a.+' 6. Darlene Landry Resident/Owner 1138 Third Ave. S. 1121 2nd Ave. S. Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Reba Agnes.Laue/Res. 1127 2nd Ave. S. Edmonds, WA 98020 Family Savings & Loan Elaine DuCharme Ellinger, Mike J. Henry & Sorrels, Inc,, P.S. #0115000834 P.O. Box 7026 1100 Aurora Vil. Plaza N. Seattle, WA 98133 Seattle, WA. 9.8133 Estelle Roberts/Res. Mike Ellinger, Res. 1130 4th Ave. S. 1139 2nd Ave. S. Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Terry Smith/Res, Karl H:. Reinholz 1139 3rd Ave. S. 1142 3rd Ave. S. Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 9.8020 Ronald Larson/Res. Wash. Federal S&L 1149 3rd Ave. S. Brinks, L.C. Edmonds, WA 98020 #90-027-17447-4 425 Pike Street Seattle, WA 9.810.1 Firstwest Mortgage L.C. Brinks/Resident Smith, Terry L. 1141 2nd Ave. S. 411002067247 Edmonds, WA 98020 401 Park Place #410 K.i rkl and, WA 98033 Seattle Mortgage Co. Lincoln Mutual Savings Bk. Spadafora, Martin #0480921 Sanchez, H.B. 229 Queen Anne N. tt02-01-011326-7 Seattle, WA 98109 P.O. Box 2285 Everett, W.A 98203 Martin Spadafora/Res. H*.B. Sanchez/Resident 1136 3rd Ave. S. 1143 2nd Ave. S. Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 F' Everett C. Oman 1483 Jefferson Anacortes, WA 98221 CITY OF EDMONDS 1 E i NOTICE OFPUBLIC HEARING !r THEN� JAM WILL HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING f 19 Duo ON THE FOLLOWING APPLICATION: FILE NO. •"~ LlAiA s Ar lrac' Rim PROPERTY ADDRESS AND LOCATION 13$ 3 ZO NE DISTRICT THE HEARING WILL BEGIN AT ' •• 36 • • M., IN THE PLAZA MEETING ROOM, LIBRARY BUILDING, 650 MAIN STREET, EDMONDS, WASHINGTON. IF YOU WISH TO COMMENT ON THIS PROPOSAL, YOU MAY COME TO THE HEARING AND SPEAK. YOU MAY ALSO WRITE A LETTER STATING YOUR VIEWS WHICH WILL BE CONSIDERED AT THE HEARING. PLEASE ADDRESS THE LETTER TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND INCLUDE THE ABOVE FILE NUMBER. IF THE ITEM IS CONTINUED TO ANOTHER HEARING BECAUSE THE AGENDA IS NOT COMPLETED, OR FURTHER INFORMATION IS NEEDED, THE DATE OF THE CONTINUED HEARING WILL BE ANNOUNCED ONLY AT THE MEETING. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION MAY BE OBTAINED AT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, 250 FIFTH AVENUE NORTH, EDMONDS (PHONE 771-3202, EXTENSION 252). THE REMOVAL, MUTILATION, DESTRUCTION, OR CONCEALMENT OF THIS NOTICE BEFORE THE DATE WARNING! OF THE HEARING IS A MISDEMEANOR PUNISHABLE BY FINE AND IMPRISONMENT. THIS NOTICE MAY BE REMOVED AFTER �. �oS��J 4, M A I �-- OD 6 /z, /16, r AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss. COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH.) FILE NO. V 30' g4P APPLICANT J)kVV-6AJ6 vl�y �%,G�IM1rl) being first duly sworn, on oath, deposes and says: That on the 2J2� day of GT0EW(L 19 $�� the attached Notice of Decision was mailed as required to adjacent property owners, the names of which were provided by the applicant. Signed , Subscribed and sworn to before me this 23'=`o day of 1910- . Notary Public in and for the State of. Washington. Residing ate° MY COMMISSION EXPIRES 6.16L89, 0 i �—•' F�t':e.l�.. t� i, C <d.��'� �a•ti{Ford 'Y'`�cl�C�+� F�, tg,F„xs. �S..a� �i h�,n .r'�±.inn_�eryji,1S`tS.�siad.4:r1.+"nh..aL2,ibi.' �` n«...s,w,:�.>.e.. FILE NO.y- '3O" APPLICANT bAyd +I)L I.�►�o►�y AFFIDAVIT OF POSTER, STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss. COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH ) V. �/)to y%A 14 being first duly sworn, on oath, deposes and says: That on the �� ap day of 0C,"T'U'6C—►2- , 19-1�L, the attached Notice of Decision was posted as prescribed by Ordinance, and in any event, in the Frances Anderson Center and Civic Center, and where applicable on or near the subject property. LSigned , Subscribed and sworn to before me this o2�3'`=� day of 19. 0 Washington. Residing at MY COMMISSION EXPIRES 6•16.Bg. • c , C' � 1` J„S „✓'ry . a' ,G. Y}„ (E, t f � i (., se _,yy . J�`I• . i, li.`n��7:.' :t.: y� .}y. .. .(.� +„' � +':.> r }'$w,-, ; r}`.: , w l a r. �.i` a . t, :`li t r`.� , t , 4� � {�.� � �"r •r .; , c: ,, y. ,';�� } ..�X? 1 ,} . f 1. "F !� �r. `•� .r !. }. . 1. � �. ,? '� , '�{. f.� k ,A f �. rt ( s ;,i f L4, Fd�fS 't h � +.� t;,�rit6�,,,.�.:liL.�ixS'�'�"'r3.t[xiii'i33:r�x�',.'E'sly`ti't..4,:r�<:i:1a,.�..si�sn.�..;�t....iin r9,sa'.si�i• :u;i47�L.,..� yam.:-+�': �.. !Yl THIS PACKET MAILED TO HEARING EXAMINER 10/30/86 EXHIBIT LIST V-30-86 EXHIBIT 1 - STAFF REPORT EXHIBIT 2 - APPLICATION/DECLARATIONS EXHIBIT 3 - PLOT PLAN EXHIBIT 4 - VICINITY MAP i' 1,. �,� . .e x 4i � iS � i i ��t <.e 5.:,• 5 . >lFijik. .sF s<�'.-f.,c—Js.'.�..�.�.a=c.._4':..a. .... � .....,.. , ,. �, .......i. w.e..._.�c,a...xw�.......� ...:..n .._ _......_ .., r EXHIBIT 1 STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER FILE: V-30-86 HEARING DATE: November 6, 1986 I. REQUESTED ACTION: Variance to reduce the required 20' street setback to 10'8" to allow a satellite dish antenna at 1138 3rd Ave. S., Edmonds. II. APPLICANT/OWNER: Darlene Landry 1138 3rd Ave. S. Edmonds, WA 98020 III. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: See Exhibit 2 IV. STAFF FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: A. Description of the Subject Property and Surrounding Area The subject property is located on the west side of 3rd Ave. S., south of the SR 104 overpass. The lot contains approximately 16,830 square feet of lot area. There is a single family residence located on the property. A satellite dish antenna was erected in the street setback without a building permit. Surrounding development is entirely single family residential. B. Official Street Map proposed R/W Existing R/W East - 3rd Ave. S. 60' 60' C. Conformance to Chapter 20.85.010 1. Special Circumstances Special circumstances do appear to exist in this particular case. The satellite dish antenna cannot be 0 Staff Report V-30-86 1 Page 2 located in either the side or rear yards, due to trees or buildings obstructing the signal transmission. 2. Special Privilege The proposed variance, as conditioned, does not appear to represent a grant of special privilege. There is no other operational area on the property to locate the antenna. 3. Comprehensive Plan The Comprehensive Policy Plan map designates the subject property and surrounding area as Low Density Residential. As, conditioned, the proposed variance, does not appear to conflict with the purposes of the Comprehensive Plan. 4. zoning Ordinance The subject property, as well as the surrounding area, is zoned RS-6. The proposed variance, as conditioned, does not appear to conflict with the purposes of the zoning ordinance and the RS-6 zone district. 5. Not Detrimental The proposed variance does not appear to pose any significant impact to the public or to any near by private property or improvement. 6. Minimum Variance The requested variance does appear to represent a minimum variance request, given the circumstances. V. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: It is the recommendation of the staff that V-30-86 be approved, subject to the following conditions: 1. The Applicant shall provide the City with evidence from a qualified technician demonstrating whereon the property the satellite dish antenna may be located in order to obtain useable satellite transmission signal. a Staff Report V-30-86 Page 3 2. The Applicant shall be required to move the antenna the maximum allowable distance in accordance with the technician's report. 3. The Applicant shall obtain a building permit• 4. The Applicant shall plant or erect a six foot high fence or hedge between the street property line and the antenna. 0 PLEASE PRINT YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS BELOW IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM AND/OR WISH TO RECEIVE A COPY OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S FINDINGS OF FACT V-30-86 DARLENE LANDRY Variance to reduce the required 20' street setback to 10'-8" to allow satellite dish antenna at 1138 Third Ave. S. NAME '�)ft YLL ADDRESS 0 U CITY OF EDMONDS 250 5lh AVE. N. • EDMONDS. WASHINGTON 98020 • (206) 771.3202 HEARING EXAMINER FINDINGS AND DECISION OF THE HEARING EXAMINER OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF DARLENE LANDRY FOR APPROVAL OF A VARIANCE DECISION: The variance is denied. INTRODUCTION CITY U:: t='.JIVIU;;DS FILE: V- 30-86 Darlene Landry, 1138 Third Avenue South, Edmonds, Washington, 98020, and hereinafter referred to as Applicant, has requested approval of a variance for a reduction of the street setback on property located at 1138 Third Avenue South, Edmonds, Washington. Specifically, the Applicant has requested the 20-foot street setback on the subject property be reduced to 10*'-8" setback in order to allow a satellite dish antenna to be located thereon. A hearing on the request was held before the Hearing Exa1t)iner of the City of Edmonds, Washington, on November 6, 1986. At the hearing the following presented testimony and. evidence: Duane Bowman Darlene 'Landry Planning Dept. 1138 3rd Ave. So. City of EdmondsEdmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 At the hearing the fallowing exhibits were submitted and admitted as part of the official record of this proceeding: Exhibit 1 - Staff Report. ' 2 - Application/Declarations 3 - Plot Plan " 4 - Vicinity Map " 5 - Statement from Television Technician " 6 - Modified Plot Plan 7 - TV Schedule Showing Channels Available " 8 - picture of Similar TV Antenna Dish 9 - Modified Staff Report -1- C y i HEARING EXAMINER RE: V-30-86 Exhibit 10 - Response of Applicant to Modified Staff Report After due consideration of the evidence presented by the Appli- cant; evidence elicited during the public hearing; and, as a result of the personal inspection of the subject property and surrounding areas by the Hearing Examiner, the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions constitute the basis of the decision of the Hearing Examiner. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Applicant has requested approval of a variance from the street setback standards for property located at 1138 Third Avenue South, Edmonds, Washington. Specifically, the Applicant has requested a variance for the reduction of a 20-foot street setback to a 10'-8" street setbae�k in order to allow a satellite dish antenna to be located within the setback. 2. The subject property is on the west side of Third Avenue. It is south of the State Route 104 overpass. The lot has approximately 16,830 square feet and there is a single-family residence located thereon. The Applicant has constructed the satellite dish antenna on the subject property and within the street setback. The satellite dish antenna was constructed without a building permit even though it is considered a structure. (Staff report and Bowman testimony.) 3. The subject property is zoned RS-6. Section 16.20.030 Edmonds. Community Development Code (ECDC) establishes the minimum street setback for RS-6 zoned property as 20 feet. It is from this section of the ECDC that the Applicant seeks a variance. (Staff report and ECDC.) 4. In order for a variance to be granted within the City of Edmonds the criteria as set forth in Section 20.85.010 ECDC must be satisfied. These criteria include: A. Because of special circumstances relating to the pro- perty, the strict enforcement of the zoning ordinance would deprive the owner of use rights and privileges permitted to other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning. B. The approval of the variance would not be a grant of special privilege to the property in comparison with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning. C. The approval of the variance will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Edmonds. -2- �. 4 J 4.,r _,....__�... ..J �_,_... x ,, .. ,.. .... ..,.. ... HEARING EXAMINER RE: V-30-86 D. The approval of the variance will be consistent with the purposes of the zoning ordinance and the zone district in which the property is located. E. The variance as approved or conditionally approved will not be significantly detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and same zone. F. The requested variance is the minimum necessary to allow the owner the rights enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning. (ECDC.) 5. The Planning Department of the City of Edmonds i.n their original Staff report (Exhibit 1) recommended approval of the requested variance. The City contended that the proposed variance satisfies the criteria of Section 20.85.010 ECDC. (Exhibit 1 and Bowman testimony.) 6. At the hearing the Applicant submitted a drawing of the subject property. The drawing of the subject property depicted the location of the satellite dish antenna and was submitted to illustrate the reception of satellite signals if located in that position. Upon review of the drawings as submitted by the Applicant, the City submitted a revision to their Staff report. The revision, dated November 13, 1.986, stated that the satellite dish antenna could be moved out of the setback to conform with`the required street setbacks and still receive the same number of satellite signals as if it were placed within the setback. As a result, the Planning Department withdrew their recommendation of approval and recommended that the satellite dish antenna be moved to conform to the required 20-foot street setback. (Exhibit 9.) 7. In response to the City's withdrawal of a recommended approval, the Applicant submitted that the satellite dish antenna was strategically placed so that only the least aesil:able satellite signals were lost, but the major satellite signals could be received (programming for NBC and the Disney channels). (Exhibit 10.) 8. The Applicant submitted that Section 16.20.050(6) ECDC requires that the Hearing Examiner in reviewing satellite dish antennas must be instructed to preserve the technical operation of the satellite television antenna while imposing such conditions as may be necessary to have that antenna blend into its surroundings. The Applicant contends that because the dish is located in an area that is screened from the north by large trees, the purpose of Section 16.20.050(6) is satisfied. According to the Applicant, if the dish is moved to comply with the setbacks, it will riot -3- f' HEARING EXAMINER RE: V-30-86 be screened and it will be completely visible. (Exhibit 10.) 9. The Applicant submitted a statement from a Television Tech- nician from the Woodinville Home Appliance, Inc. stating that the existing location of the satellite dish antenna is the only place in which it will work unless it is moved closer to the street (Third Avenue South). (Exhibit 5.) 10. The Applicant submitted that the satellite dish antenna was installed prior to the passage of Section 16.20.050 ECDC and should be grandfathered in as an allowed use. (Exhibit 10.) 11. Section 16.20.050(D)(2) ECDC requires that satellite tele- vision antennas shall be located only in the rear yard of any lot. In the event that no usable satellite signal can be obtained in the rear yard location, or in the event that no rear lot exists as in the case of corner iots, satellite television antennas shall be located in the side yard. In the event that a usable satellite signal cannot be obtained in either the rear or side yard, then a roof -mounted location may be approved by the staff provided, however, that any roof -mounted satellite antenna shall be consistent with roofing materials. There is no mention in Section 16.20.050 about the location of the satellite dish in the front yard. It is also from this section that the Applicant seeks a variance. (Exhibit 2 and Exhibit 10.) 12. The Applicant submitted that tree obstructions on her pro- perty and on neighbors properties, prevent installation of the satellite dish antenna in any location other than the front yard of the subject property. (Landry testimony and Exhibit 2.) 13. The Applicant submitted that without her television satel- lite dish antenna she is only able to receive two channels on her television . The reception on these channels is "snowy." (Exhibit 2.) 14. The City submitted that the Applicant is restricted in getting reception from the rear yard and side yard of her property and also from the roof. As a result, the City has agreed that the Applicant should be allowed a variance to place the satellite dish antenna in the front yard of the subject property. The issue with the City was not the site location of the satellite dish antenna as much as the adherence to the setback standards for R-6 zoned property. (Bowman testimony.) CONCLUSIONS 1. The application is for the approval of a variance for the reduction of the required street setback on property located at 1138 Third Avenue South, Edmonds, Washington. The -4- _ R �•.f.• ��`u� `'�r. ...FL �� �k. .C�-<ti� .,,� � � r' ..a5 lR �� ,��„a a�.lt.Ti.:. ., .33 ..,,".�`�,. sa ,+, .�.,�... ,s�. x.,«n, �. �.,�. ... .. .. ......... ..�.., ,�,. ., .._a........_ _s �_... .. ._ �. �. .. HEARING EXAMINER RE( J-30-86 requested variance is for a reduction of the 20-foot street setback to a 10'-8" setback in order to allow a satellite dish antenna to remain as constructed. 2. The Applicant applied for a variance from the location standards for a satellite television antenna. The City has agreed that the location of the satellite dish antenna is limited to the front yard of the subject property. The City, however, does not agree as to the location of the satellite television antenna within the subject property. The City contends that the antenna is a structure and must satisfy the setback standards for RS-6 zoned property. 3. In order for a variance to be -granted within the City of Edmonds the criteria as set forth in Section 20.85.010 ECDC must be satisfied. The application for the reduction of the street setback fails to satisfy these criteria. 4. The satellite television antenna is a structure as defined in Section 21.90.150 ECDC. 5. No special circumstances exist for the granting of a variance for the reduced street setback. The Applicant will be able to receive television reception if the antenna dish is placed in the front yard and the 20-foot street setback is adhered to. 6. The granting of a variance would be the grant of a special_ privilege to the Applicant. 7. The grant of a variance does not conflict with the purposes of the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Edmonds. 8. The grant of a.variance will be in conflict with the pur- poses of the RS-6 zoned property in that it would not be a nonresidential use which complements or is compatible with single-family dwelling uses. 9. The requested variance would not be detrimental to the pro- perties in the area. 10. The requested variance .represents the minimum variance request. DECISION Based on the preceding Findings of Fact and Conclusions; the testimony and evidence submitted at the public hearing; and, upon the impressions of the Hearing Examiner at a site view, it is hereby ordered that the requested reduced street setback for RS-6 zoned property from a 20-foot street setback to a 10'-8" setback is denied. The denial of this variance is based on the fact that the -5- ''�; � G�XC� $Y��i.RR��(5'..:�.i"1:�LALt�Ga�1...�d3xtv:L�L1�i. ,.,;`..J .� ,.. . _ ,..c. _., ,_ � :•, •. f '',y, � �' � y r7 �, .�..:.,£vsi.'i'.�'w.;.u.�.,:n;:,i:,.,.__........y,.>u.. ._.__ .. .. ... .. a...,. .. .L....a.<.., _C. BEARING EXAMINER RE:( -30-86 J � Applicant could receive basically the same reception if the satellite television antenna were placed in the area that adheres to the setback standards for RS-6 zoned property. As a result, no special circumstances appear to exist for the granting of a variance. Because the satellite dish antenna is a structure, as defined in the ECDC, a building permit is required for its construction. The Applicant has not constructed the satellite dish antenna with a building permit. As a result, there is no vested interest of the Applicant in maintaining the satellite dish antenna as it is located. It is noted that the criteria for the variance, ECDC Section 20.85.010, is the controlling law in this case. The satellite ordinance, ECDC Section 16.20.050, was applied in the allowance of the Applicant to locate the satellite television antenna in the front yard of the subject property. Entered this 12th day of December, 1986, pursuant to t-he authority granted the Hearing Examiner under Chapter 20.100 of the Community Development Code of the City of Edmonds. A101 ES DRISCOLL aring Examiner NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL Written appeals alleging specific error of fact or other grounds for appeal may be filed with the Planning Department, City of Edmonds, Civic Center, Edmonds, Washington, 98020, within fourteen days of the date of the Hearing Examiner's final action. In this matter any appeal must be received by the Department prior to 5:00 p.m. on December 31, 1986. K�a< t � ``sf s£4'�i`a"«L �yxw=��r`'sa r Y,v',",4•�= �t i ✓�`y,Ll ��i S� �,c7`�"�. r r"E.::6tY;s"iafNGu'J / t MEMORANDUM November 13, 1986 TO: James M. Driscoll Hearing Examiner FROM: Duane V. Bowman Assistant City Planner SUBJECT: Revision to Staff Report V-30-86 It would appear from the drawing submitted by the Applicant that the satellite dish antenna could be moved to conform with the required street setback and still receive the same number of satellites. It is therefore the recommendation of the staff that the satellite dish be moved to conform to the required 20' street setback, with landscaping to screen the antenna from the street. cc: Darlene Landry l �r N D S LARRY S. NAUGHTEN CITY OF E 13 M ® MAYOR 1. 250 51h AVE. N. EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 98020 • (206) 771.3202 PETER E. HAHN COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTOR DATE : November 20, 1986 TO: James Driscoll 520 Pike Street Suite 1505 Seattle, WA 98101 1 i TRANSMITTING: CORRESPONDENCE FROM DARLENE LANDRY REGARDING FILE #V-30-86 AS YOU REQUESTED: FOR YOUR INFORMATION: AS WE DISCUSSED: FOR APPROVAL: FOR YOUR FILE: XXX REVIEW AND COMMENT COMMENT AND RETURN: MINUTES OF 14EETING: REMARKS PLANNING DIVISION cc: C. Betteridge Susan Painter PUBLIC WORKS PLANNING PARKS AND RECREATION 0 ENGINEERING e Nov. 20, 1986 REl.ti1/ED NOV 2 91986 110: James i'I. .0riscoll IIearinf�; Lxami_ner GIU OF EDMOND;,-�' From: Darlene Landry 1138 3rd Ave. S o . Edmonds, vJa.. 98020 771-2051 Subject: Response to Reyi_sion of :=staff arporl- V-_�O- FFS It is uridersta.nd 'ble til. ;t 1.r. POWITldil i; C 1.11Ci receive ��,- I.,rn :t r.i._. �;1 t;.� ,ncv:. mySatellit:; dish back to the require-re:(a 20 ft. street setb�:ck. What Mr. bowman fails to understand, and/or point out is that I would loose reception on two and possibly more oT the Pla-or satellites located in the belt. The first being Satcom1 which carries the major network programming for NBC or more commonly known as channel 5. The second being Galaxy I (GI) which carries the Discovery channel, the Disney channels and several other desirable channels. (R.efer- to _letter from the technician that installr'd said dish).. Mr. Bowman is correct in that I would receive two others instead of these,' two, but the two that I would .receive are not desirable to the average home owner. 'Phis antenna wa.s stra.,te xically placed so that only the least desirable satellites were lost, due to the location of trees on neighboring :property. Your own ordinance states that "In exercising; the mower herein n,ra,.nted, the Heari-nf. is instructed to preserve the technic;1 operation 01 the satellite antenna while imposing, such conditions as may be necessary to have that antenna blend into its ggrroundings", (See enclosure - highlited area). In addition to the above, this dish is presently screened from the north and from my neighbor to the north by large trees. .If the dish is moved back, I will loose that screening and the dish would then be completely out in the open and visible by all, including -the 1_04- : 0verpass. I would welcome an on sight inspection by yourself, and then I think you would agree that from an Aesthetic point of view, its present location is in -the best interest of all. I would also like to take this opportunity to re -iterate the fact that this satellite dish wps installed prior to the passage of any city ordinance --overninEr Vh.e location of satellite dish antennas and therei'oi_�e: shot.,LT not h,: effected by said ordinance in the first place. `1'hanlr ,you for your consideration, I am, '1ery truly yours .ua len6 Lendry �ws ti?. cL•'»A...t riaa.ta✓+...nli!f ° r �" _ ..' v...V. _. s, ..,.. _ _ _ ..w-.T!'.• 4 .,.,7,.w�.?l.1.1_ • a l � ELLITE E 0 D N A Nk(=� 16 20.050 Accessory Structures. * w I D. Satellite Television Antenna. The following regulations shall apply to the installation of a satellite television antenna: 1. General. Satellite television antennas 'must be inst—al-id and maintained in compliance with the Uniform Building and Electrical Codes as the same exist or hereafter amended. A building permit shall be required in order to install any such device. 2. Setbacks. In all zones subject to the provisio"' ns contained herein, a satellite television antenna shall be located only in the rear yard of any lot. In the event that no usable satellite signal can be obtained in the rear lot location or in the event that no rear lot exists as in the case of a corner lot, satellite television antennas shall then be located in the side yard. In the event that a usable satellite signal cannot be obtained in either the rear or side yard, then a roof mounted location may be approved by the staff provided, however, that any roof mounted satellite antenna shall be in a color calculated to blend in with existing roof materials and, in the case of a parabolic, spherical or dish antenna shall not exceed nine (9) feet in diameter unless otherwise provided for by these ordinances. In no event shall any roof mounted satellite television antenna exceed the maximum height limitations established by these ordinances. 3. Aesthetic. Satellite television antennas shall a finished in a non -garish, non -reflective color and surface which shall blend into its" surroundings. In the case of a parabolic, spherical or dish antenna, said antenna shall be of a' mesh construction. 4. size and height. Maximum size for a ground mounte pare o 1c, spherical or dish antenna shall be twelve (12) feet in diameter. No ground mounted antenna shall be greater than fifteen (15) feet in height unless otherwise approved for waiver as herein provided. Roof mounted satellite television antennas shall not exceed the lesser of the height of the antenna when mounted on a standard base provided by the manufacturer or installer for ordinary operation of the antenna or the height limitation provided by the zoning code. 5. Number. only one satellite television antenna shall be permitted on any residential lot or parcel of land. In no case shall a satellite television antenna be permitted to be attached to a portable device for the purpose of relocating the entire antenna on the property in order to circumvent the intentions of this ordinance. 6. Technolo ical impracticality-. basip fOcation waiver. In the avant t ar t o strict a p at the provisions of this zoning code would make it impossible for satellite television antenna upon any lot in the City, to receive a usable satellite signal, or in the event that the property owner believes that alternatives exist which are less burdensome to adjacent property owners, the property owner may make application to the Hearing Examinec for a waiver from these provisions. The liaaring Examiner may grant such a waiver upon findings that either: a. Technological impracticality: (1) Actual compliance with the existing provisions of the City's zoning ordinance would prevent the satellite television antenna from receiving a usable satellite signal, and (2) The alternatives proposed by the property owner constitute the minimum necessary to permit acquisition of a usable satellite signal by the satellite television antenna. in granting the waiver, the Hearing Examiner is ordered to impose such conditions as may be necessary to place the minimum burden on adjacent property owners, such conditions may include but are not limited to requirements for screening and 1•dtidscaping, review of the color and reflectivity of the proposed satellite television antenna, and any other reasonable restriction consistent with the intent of the City Council that this waiver be used only as the minimum necessary to permit the satellite television antenna to acquire a usable satellite signal while preserving the aesthetic harmony of the community. In exere p_ghe Hower herein rvami.n LEY is instructed, ��—tovisLinn antenna in order that accure a rt�hln aah�l while s nq such conditLons . e:necessary a antenna blend into its groundings. b. Less burdensome alternativcs: The Hearing Examiner s a so authorized to censidp.r the application of property owners foe waivers consistent with the provisions of 41 subseetlon (a) above without requiring a finding that no usable satellite signal can be acquired when the applicant establishes hat the alternatives proposed by the applicant are less burdensome to the abutting property owners than the requirements imposed y the provisions of thLs ordinance. C. The application fee and notifiction for the consideration of the waiver shall be the same as that provided for processing a variance. GGiver In the event that an applicant for iver is also obligated to obtain Architectural Design Review, the Architectural Design Board shall defer to the Hearing Examiner. The Hearing Fxaminer may, at his/har discretion request Architectural Design Board review and comment in order that a required screening and Landscaping may be. integrated into site and landscaping plans. No additional fee shall be required of the applicant upon such referral. 0..�5 6k_�sr\ , am EXHIBIT 2 -� _-W-7 - DATE CCU G-7 CITY OF EDMONDS FEE HEARING EXAMINER RECT APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE APO'S 1L HEARING DATE: APPLICANT , o4t-(- L1 9 5 �j'S' T� ��'�� ADDRESS_i46�oeold- CITY & ZIP r•�;%oL ��(%�. 9/_C7 PHONE — 63e/,- 5 77 3 INDICATE TYPE OR DEGREE OF INTEREST IN PROPERTY LOCATION OR ADDRESS OF PROPERTY 4V,� q 3ie 'r�{v C�['�, �dinc7+►rb5 9RC7�C7 LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY_ `��A F— c=T /�)n �►-, \� �� n) o ��H c,a s G nt , Q ► eQX(?, )d RM 4 E&S-r O. Q ra rZ C:[: , ToI,JNSP I P e� 7 n►ns2-.,. f�nr 3 1%�r ;' li)�ti c c c ST,a� �' 1n� Sti�r�lsla G�OUNr }w, VARIANCE REQUESTED : j Dj `iFey &, a9-- }-P1 G-W7— FOR OFFICE USE 0`LY : USE ZONE: �i1'�-�•� i ZONING ORDIN NC REQUIREMENT: 25 rAA)(1W%-Uw• )-1516, lr Release/Hold Harmless Agreement The undersio ed aoplicant, his heirs and assigns, in consideration for. the City she application agrees to release, indemnify, defend and y osz ho ld the Ci,_-; o= Edmonds harmless from any and all damages and/or claims for damages, includi reasonable attorneys' fees, arising from any action or inaction is used in whole or in hart upon .false, misleading or incomplete information furn-shed by the applicant, his agents or employees. Permission to Enter Subject Property The undersigned applicant grants his, her or its permission for public officials and the staff of the City of Edmonds to enter the subject property for the purpose o= inspection and posting attendant ^to this application. ignature of Owner or Representative 0 �`'�?�«k,QK�iS��ii..iri"�.:,EC:`i'..f.��3i'�w`::.wi�6,:k«.FaJ....`� E.e+.,,_........-,..., ...... w, ,... _.....1....._.............._...,_.....a.........,il._,.i... s,..�..s_<...__.....,... .,.._,__._.s._...,....,...�._:"...,......_._,...a._r.....,w�._..,..:.,+.....wt.�.:M.te.....::,ee:'m.....,S..sia.a.a_,e.. .... ...,.. DECLARATIONS OF APPLICANT Please answer all questions 1. What are the physical characteristics, (i.e. topography, shape of lot, etc.) which create a hardship for you in regard to development of your property? / 2. How does your property differ from other property in the same vicinity? IZ 3. Will this variance be detrimental to the public or damaging to other property or imorovemnents _n the vicinity? 4. What hardships will- result to you i_ the variance is not granted? Will these hardships have bee caused by your own, action? All Z- C97- (e- A-4 4e 'A2g c e., 5. Can you make reasonable use of your property without the variance? 0 ` EXHIBIT 3 a` z *— -- k?�.. i CdS ►u o S S;4. 1'to 4'i S 'g If it►044V11F �.�, UHr C: Lk 13 At pale 9 d i pole CL. 7 At, polc �rodbai X VH P EXHIBIT' 4* 5�1e TWO - 15th Ave. N.E. • AUBURN, WA 98002 (206) 939-7200 722-4224 Satellite System Technology Attn: Mr. William E. Lipscomb 4600 Aurora Ave North Seattle, Wa. 98103 i July 15, 1987 i Ret Satellite antenna location at Edmonds Park Apartments 424 3rd Ave. So. Edmonds, Wa. 98020 Dear Mr. Lipscomb, Trans View Cable completely surveyed at the above subject location for an alternative location for the satellite antenna. Due to the low ground level and the high obstacles, ie, buildings and trees directly to the south, there is no other location to locate the antenna except at it's present location. IfII can be of any further assistance, call me. i Sincerely, James A. Hallock President Trans View Cable please do not hesitate to ..,,.. .4, �/^ roLf_;t.,.,aa_....v:..da.ru.�....'..:u1.�....... k.. ...._i ..an ......_., :... ., _....,.. ... ,.. ... _ ...�.<.�.._..........,.a,rn.e+,,......e...L'.?XsLS+}........_ :J'' .My Of Edmond Bobby. Mills PW INTER -OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE Gary McComas - Fire ' Dan Smith/Jerry Hauth - Engineering TO FROM Duane Bowman DATE. 8 10 87 RI IR.IFC T V-25-87 VARIANCE TO INCREASE ANTENNA HUGHT FOR SATELLITE AT EDMONDS PARK APARTMENTS AT 424 3RD AVE. S. HEARING DATE: SEPTEMBER 3, 1987 R E C E I VE1) PLEASE RESPOND WITH YOUR COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AU G AUGUST 24, 1987. �� THANKS. PUBLIC WORKS, gt, L je5 rA 01ty of Edmonca 'y Mills - PW INTER -OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE ' ry McComas::- Fire jan Smith/Jerry Haut h - Engineering f. TO FROM Duane Bowman DATE 8 10 87 SUBJECT V-25-87 VARIANCE TO INCREASE ANTENNA HEZHT FOR SATELLITE AT EDMONDS PARK APARTMENTS AT 424 3RD AVE. S. NEARING DATE: SEPTEMBER 3, 1987 PLEASE RESPOND WITH YOUR COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AUGUST 24, 1987. THANKS. E��C:-'•V D AUG 1 1 1987 EDMOt,IDS FIRE DEPT;, De. c vlty of Edmon".s RECEIVED Bobby Mills - PW INTER -OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE AUG 1987 Gary McComas - Fire . ENGINEERING Dan'Smith/Jerry Hauth - Engineering Bo wman owman TO FROM DDATE ---a/10 87 SUBJECT — V-25-87 VARIANCE TO INCREASE ANTENNA HGHT FOR SATELLITE AT EDMONDS PARK APARTMENTS AT 424 3RD AVE. S. HEARING DATE: SEPTEMBER 3, 1987 PLEASE RESPOND WITH YOUR COMMENTS NO LATER THAN AUGUST 24, 1987. THANKS. ' '!�'`'hR-.�Y.0 '�h�wi].iC".r�C47•.C�—.,�'a`�'� d� ' It z 4•''fa +fit n 1 k ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS LIST ti On my oath, I certify that the names and addresses provided represent all properties located within 80 feet of the subject Grocer y. Signature 6p I ant or lop!icant's Representative Subscribed and swor to before me th's day of , ., Notary Pub is i 'and for the State of Washington Residing at 4��71 1060 0o s`c- 79 L(37 1.I4rLWGtV0'4�Io2 A AG 727-3 t Dowet cvg� 011 �P1L, PV•r 9�710 Won, -a7-3 1lA(�e,.j pcoEre5v.J oZ01I1 3 — R 5Tt Nc,J SCAM � e. 'L J P� 9f 8 1 -7 -7 a3—a7-3--ti�io 3 (� 0 L1 L-A Initials Date PrepareU by — ApproveU by V I li z ;7i Y, 1 I 2 3 Gc c_-, — 2.._-1 � I G y�.GLal. ,L�'� n Gr/��-!�1/ f� ln✓ I I _ . I I: I �J2/:. 2 r%mot f% - -- -3 - I -/�a2.- __�i CG� /�tLGa.��c� I I I �J�' ..,ti ct% GY.tO r{_ n / f i f I�� _ - - -1--`f� - - --, -%/� EZ 6 10 10 I I i `�, , ---- --- j -- --Z� �-- •/UG�j.o-n-tlti i � i '� � j II � I I� 11 12- a.2-- _-W_M,/�j�zrr7tiar I I 12 r, 13 Q3- G,_`�Jz,✓II I it 13 14 J� 15 � 14 Q �I t C.t�U u ti2� i i I 15 I I lG ` - -! -.-, -- - 16 17 TD-- Cr_I j 17 18 ' /` /C/•li�v�aLd wyI � � I I I I 19 _'`0 20 . I 21 / __ YL1LiG_/%ZLJ._.C✓Yitt L_ j ht I , j 21 - III i _ r I -Z z -- off=.//GG�a �r�✓i ate:22 22 23 I�23 24-9s' >%sy_ / �C� �� _ - -. -- Zn 25 25 26 -21��� 26 77 I I v1 II 11 - - 27 8 28 �2,�-/ 2r.�. vS/ ram/ i 29 30 30 31 14l�' II��2lG�Gaz /uk31 ,32 32 3:2 IlO.r 33 • 4- J- u - 4 - - - - -- - 1 - ' 35 36 C�Go� sc c �sc� �' j - -- - � I I � 37Q-37 - 38 31; j i U ' j I I 72L� . (✓, � , .Chi-�' I - -- ..i.'Lc 1 n/Z--• - -- -. �/� 39 40 i 41 43 I 44 1 45 n I 45 .17 49 50 ?yd� �Cvc-G.� l�G-.v,•i• �yir� Gsl �w' I i � j - 5o II. -- Wash. Mtg. Co. Inc Gildorn Mtg. Midwest Karen Pederson Olympic View Apt. Southview Apt. 20413 25th NW 2720 Third Ave. 1501 Woodfield Rd. Seattle, WA 98177 Seattle, WA 98121 Schaumberg, Il 96195 Keith F. Leives James S. Sorrek Bonnie O'Brien Box 444 7821 175th SW 7812 175th SW Edmonds, WA 98020 !:almonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 John & Cherie Kazka John Peck/Resident Mr. & Mrs. Pohl/Resident 403 3rd Ave. S. 424 3rd Ave. S. #104 424 3rd Ave. S. #110 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Walter Heggen/Resident Hazel Larson/Resident Mr. & Mrs. Adams/Resident 424 3rd Ave. S. #111 424 3rd Ave. S. #112 424 3rd Ave. S. #113 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edith Scharf/Resident Mr. A. Manger/Resident Robert Browning/Resident 424 3rd Ave. S. #114 424 3rd Ave. S. #115 424 3rd Ave. S. #116 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Mr. & Mrs. Peterson Dagmar Morrison/Resident Mr. & Mrs. Hanson/Resident 424 3rd Ave. S. 111417 424 3rd Ave. S. #201 424 3rd Ave. S. #202 y, Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Mrs. McCubbin/Resident James Gamble i Alice Eisenhauer 4 424 3rd Ave. S. #203 424 3rd Ave. S. #204 424 3rd Ave. S. #205 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Gregory Bradford/Resident Christine Burke/Resident Mr. & Mrs. Anderson 424 3rd Ave. S. #206 424 3rd Ave. S. #207 424 3rd Ave. S. #208 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 i Edmonds, WA 98020 Winifred Yearley/Resident Mr & Mrs. Lester/Resident { Mr. & Mrs. Gray/Resident ' 424 3rd Ave. S. #209 424 3rd Ave. S. #210 424 3rd Ave. S. #211 4 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 CC086 VM `pUel�aLN 5ZL86 VM `aL;Z2aS £0686 VM `aL��2aS ZOl// 'PALO 'VM 8�2J LEtib 'ZS.�ZOOL 3N 090L i 'N 'anV 2aoanV 00gt LL2H '3 PL2aaC ;uawa62u2W ;aadoad s,nM -yoai MISSS sLLLO;PS 3 John Rasmussen/Resident 424 3rd Ave. S. #212 Edmonds, WA 98020 Beverly Fitzsimmons 424 3rd Ave. S. #215 Edmonds, WA 98020 Lydia Munn/Resident 424 3rd Ave. S. #301 Edmonds, WA 98020 Mr. & Mrs. Rafter/Resident 424 3rd Ave. S. #213 Edmonds, WA 98020 Florence Hodges/Resident 424 3rd Ave. S. #216 Edmonds, WA 98020 Mr. & Mrs. Stritzel 424 3rd Ave. S. 302 Edmonds, WA 98020 Mr. & Mrs. Day/Resident 424 3rd Ave. S. #214 Edmonds. WA 98020 Mr. & Mrs. Sensmeier 424 3rd Ave. S. #217 Edmonds, WA 98020 Marie Botnen/Resident 424 3rd Ave. S. #303 Edmonds, WA 98020 Mrs. V.A. Michael/Resident Ruth Johnson/Resident Mary Boren/Resident 424 3rd Ave. S. #304 424 3rd Ave. S. #305 3rd Ave. S. ��306 l Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edm Ruth Curry/Resident Jacqueline Rae/Resident Cecil Griffith/Resident 424 3rd Ave. S. #307 424 3rd Ave. S. #308 424 3rd Ave. S. #309 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Mrs. C. L. Firth/Resident Jack Guin/Resident Susan Gusten/Resident I 424 3rd Ave. S. #310 424 3rd Ave. S. #311 424 3rd Ave. S. #312 �. Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 i j Patricia Dreyfous/Resident Mr. & Mrs. Reid/Resident Mr. & Mrs. Thompson 424 3rd Ave. S. # 313 424 3rd Ave. S. #314 424 3rd Ave. S. #315 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 G. Bookey/Resident Resident Donald, Smith/Reti:dent 424 3rd Ave. S. #317 424 3rd Ave. S. #316 424 3rd Ave. S. #400 Edmonds, WA 980Z0 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Carol Ann Carnahan/Residen- Robert Stading/Resident Ron Johnson/Resident 424 3rd Ave. S. #401 424 3rd Ave. S. #402 ` 424 3rd Ave. S. #403 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 I i r Mr. & Mrs. Songy Joan Brown/Resident S. #405 Ray Aliberti r dS,Ave #406 4243rd 424 3rd Ave. S. #404 Edmonds, WA 98020 424 3rd Ave. Edmonds, WA 98020 9S. Peter Adabashian/Resident 424 3rd Ave. S. #408 Edmonds, WA 98020 Marjorie Peterson/Resident 424 3rd Ave. S. #409 Edmonds, WA 98020 0 {� CITY.-` OF. EDMONDS a4N �f _ ......... .. NOTI: E U .. i j-..Y�1' TH FA WILL HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING' TI404S L, 6Feer* t? 19 7 , ON THE FOLLOWING APPLICATION: FILE NO. V - 4,7 PROPERTY ADDRESS AND LOCATION - ZONE DISTRICT • VA I I 4!a THE HEARING WILL BEGIN AT • ® • M., IN THE PLAZA MEETING ROOM, LIBRARY ' BUILDING, 650 MAIN STREET, EDMONDS, WASHINGTON. IF YOU WISH TO COMMENT ON THIS PROPOSAL, YOU MAY COME.TO THE HEARING AND SPEAK. YOU MAY ALSO WRITE A LETTER STATING YOUR VIEWS WHICH WILL BE CONSIDERED AT THE HEARING. PLEASE ADDRESS THE LETTER TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND INCLUDE -THE ABOVE FILE NUMBER. [YV IF THE ITEM IS CONTINUED TO ANOTHER HEARING BECAUSE THE AGENDA IS NOT COMPLETED, OR FURTHER INFORMATION IS NEEDED, THE DATE OF THE CONTINUED HEARING WILL BE ANNOUNCED ONLY AT THE MEETING. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION MAY BE OBTAINED AT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, 250 FIFTH AVENUE '-NORTH, EDMONDS (PHONE 771-3202, EXTENSION 252). MUTILATION, DESTRUCTION, THE REMOVAL, NOTICE BEFORETHE DATE WAFINING-1. OOF NCEALMENT THE HEARING IS A (MISDEMEANOR PUNISHABLE _.. . BY FINE_ AND IMPRISONMi[ENT , THIS NOTICE MAY BE REMOVE D AFTER i IIr,. 1. STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ss. COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH ) Duane Bowman FILE NO. V-25-87 APPLICANT Satellis Systems Tech. AFFIDAVIT OF POSTER being first duly sworn, on oath, deposes and says: That on the 3rd day of September 19 87 the attached Notice of Public Hearing was posted as prescribed by Ordinance, and in any event, in the Frances Anderson Center and Civic Center, and where applicable on or near the subject property, Signed v Subscribed and sworn to before me this�� day of 19_ff-7—, Nbtary Public in and for the State of Washington. Residing at / MY COMMISSION EXPIRES 6-16.85 0 -�'.�.1-iJu.1� 4 �....x_.�.....w__. ....... I .. ... ... _..... _v-.-.... �...........�.v.._...,w-.ti...J..!_........i._..u..i.a..� �C �...un±AY'yea�Asi-w FILE NO. y_25_p7 APPLICANT Satellis Systems Tech. AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ss. COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH ) Diane M. Cunningham being first duly sworn, on oath deposes and says: That on the 3rd day of September ,19 87 the attached Notice of Public Hearing was mailed as required to adjacent property owners, the names of which were provided by the applicant. 7 c Subscribed and sworn to before me this q a) day of' 19 N dtary Public in and far the. State of Washington. Residing at���-� My COMMIRSION EXPIBEq_6-i6-89._ 0 EXHIBIT 1 STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER FILE: V-25-87 HEARING DATE: September 17, 1987 I. REQUESTED ACTION: Variance to allow a roof mounted satellite dish antenna at 424 3rd Ave. S. to exceed the permitted 25' height limit by 20'. II. APPLICANT/OWNER: Applicant - Satellite System Technology Attn: William Lipscomb 4600 Aurora Ave. N. Seattle, WA 98103 Owner - WU Property Investments 1060 N.E. 100th Seattle, WA 98125 III. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: See Exhibit 2 IV. STAFF FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: A. Description of the Subject Property and Surrounding Area The subject property is located on the west side of 3rd Ave. S. The property is developed with a 52 unit apartment building. The applicant is seeking a variance to allow a satellite dish antenna on the roof of the existing apartment building. Surrounding development is a mixture of single family and multiple family uses. To the west, across SR 104, the uses are commercial and a natural marsh. B. Official Street Map 4-4 R/W East - 3rd Ave. S. West - SR 104 Proposed R/W 15' 175' Exis ing 15' 175' Staff Report V-25-87 C. Conformance to Chapter 20.85.010 1. Special Circumstances Page 2 The code requires a mesh type antenna. Due to the location, size and color of the antenna, it should pose no problem aesthetically. In order to obtain acceptable reception, a roof top location is necessary. 2. Special Privilege As conditioned, the proposed variance does not appear to represent a grant of special privilege. 3. Comprehensive Plan The Comprehensive Policy Plan map designates the subject property as High Density Residential, as are the adjacent residential properties. As conditioned, the proposed variance does not appear to conflict with the purposes of the Comprehensive Plan. 4. Zoning Ordinance The subject property, as well as the surrounding properties, is zoned RM-2.4. As conditioned, the proposed variance does not appear to conflict with the purposes of the zoning ordinance or the RM-2.4 zone district. 5. Not Detrimental As conditioned, the proposed variance does not appear to pose any significant impact to the public or to any near by private property or improvement. 6. Minimum Variance Based upon the locational circumstances, the requested variance does appear to represent a minimum variance request. V. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of V-24-87, subject to the following conditions: U. I 0 Staff Report V-25-87 i t Page 3 1. The satellite dish antenna comply with all Architectural Design Board requirements. 2. With the exception of the satellite dish antenna, the existing television antennas be removed. n J i ti,���.. ,'€�`�,y��! ,yt au 4w: I-+m.twa•+�....n.,e4..wuct :.au.:.c...::�—,_]o`. t :hGi.:1"7t. PLEASE PRINT YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS BELOW IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM AND/OR WISH TO RECEIVE A COPY OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S FINDINGS OF FACT V-25-87 WILLIAM LIPSCOMB Variance to allow existing roof top satellite dish antenna to exceed the permitted 25 foot height limit at 424 3rd Ave. S. NAME ADDRESS (Include city and zip code) LI60D �?o l..r ,. ... .,. .. 1 CITY OF EDMONDS LARRY S. NAUGHTEN MAYOR 250 6Ih AVE, N. • EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 98020 • (206) 771.3202 HEARING EXAMINER FINDINGS AND DECISION Ca e , .� � D OF THE HEARING EXAMINER OF THE 6 198 CITY OF EDMONDS �'(0�i ,,n T ' Depr. IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF FILE: V-25-87 SATELLITE SYSTEM TECHNOLOGY FOR APPROVAL OF A VARIANCE DECISION: The variance is granted subject to the conditions listed. INTRODUCTION Satellite System Technology, 4600 Aurora Avenue North, Seattle, Washington, 98103, (hereinafter referred to as Applicant) has requested approval of a variance to allow a roof -mounted satellite dish antenna at 424 Third Avenue South to exceed the permitted 25-foot height limit by 20 feet. A hearing on the request was held before the Hearing Examiner of the City of Edmonds, Washington, on September 17, 1987. At the hearing the following presented testimony and evidence: Duane Bowman William Lipscomb Planning Dept. 4600 Aurora Ave. North City of Edmonds Seattle, WA 98103 Edmonds, WA 98020 At the hearing the following exhibits were submitted and admitted as part of the official record of this proceeding: Exhibit 1 - Staff Report if 2 - Application/Declarations it 3 - Roof Top Antenna Location Drawing it 4 - Transview Cable Co. Letter After due consideration of the evidence presented by the Appli- cant and evidence elicited during the public hearing the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions constitute the basis of the decision of the Hearing Examiner. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Applicant has requested a variance to allow a roof - mounted satellite dish antenna at 424 Third Avenue South, Edmonds, Washington, to exceed the permitted 25-foot height limit by an additional 20 feet. (Staff report.) September 30, 1987 Page 1 0 HEARING EXAMINER'S ECISION RE: V-25-87 2. Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) 16.20.050(B)(4) sets forth that roof -mounted satellite television antennas shall not exceed the lesser of the height of the antenna when mounted on a standard base provided by the manu- facturer, or installer, for ordinary operation of the antenna, or the height limitation provided by the zoning code. The Planning Department has determined that the height of the roof -mounted satellite television antenna at 424 Third Avenue South cannot exceed the height limitation for the subject property. (Bowman testimony.) 3. The subject property is zoned RM-2.4. ECDC 16.30.030(A) establishes the maximum height for RM-2.4 zoned property as 25 feet. The Applicant seeks a variance from this standard for the allowance of the satellite dish antenna to exceed the permitted 25 feet height limit by 20 feet. (Staff report and Bowman testimony.) 4. In order for a variance to be granted within the City of Edmonds the criteria as set forth in ECDC 20.85.010 must be satisfied. These criteria include: A. Because of special circumstances relating to the property, the strict enforcement of the zoning ordinance would deprive the owner of use rights and privileges permitted to other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning. B. The approval of the variance would not be a grant of special privilege to the property in comparison with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning. C. The approval of the variance will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Edmonds. D. The approval of the variance will be consistent with the purposes of the zoning ordinance and the zone district in which the property is located. E. The variance as approved or conditionally approved will not be significantly detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and same zone. F. The requested variance is the minimum necessary to allow the owner the rights enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning. (ECDC.) 5. The building that is located at 424 Third Avenue South is a building that is 25 feet and was constructed under a September 30, 1987 Page 2 r HEARING EXAMINER'Sf ECISION RE: v-25-87 previous zoning code. Thus, any additions in height to this building require a variance. The proposed antenna is to be 10 feet above the existing roof top. Therefore, the 20-foot variance is required. (Bowman testimony.) 6. The building on the subject property is a 52-unit apartment building. The building's location creates many difficulties for television reception and a roof -top location for the satellite dish antenna is necessary for acceptable reception. (Bowman testimony.) 7. ECDC 16.20.040(D)(3) requires that dish antennas be made of mesh material. However, the Planning Department has deter- mined that the location of the dish antenna, on top of the roof of the building on the subject property, and its size and color will not create aesthetic problems. (Bowman testimony.) 8. The Planning Department determined that the requested variance will not be the grant of a special privilege. It will allow adequate television reception for residents of the apartment building on site. (Bowman testimony.) 9. The Comprehensive Policy Plan Map of the City of Edmonds designates the subject property as High Density Residential. The proposal will be consistent with the Edmonds Compre- hensive Plan and the 15�205010(CP(2)(b)S alanolicieas set (Stafff�eportrth therein and especially ECDC Bowman testimony.) 10. As conditioned the proposed variance will not create a significant impact to the public, nor to nearby private property or improvements. (Staff report.) 11. The requested variance appears to be the minimum variance for the Applicant to enjoy the property in a manner similar to other properties in the area. (Staff report and Bowman testimony.) 12. Television antennas are located on the roof top. These antennas are located on the roof top for the purpose of providing local television coverage to the residents of the apartment units. The satellite dish antenna would provide cable reception. (Lipscomb testimony.) 13. The Planning Department of the City of Edmonds submitted a recommendation of approval of the variance subject to the following conditions: 1. The satellite dish antenna comply with all Architectural Design Board requirements. 2. With the exception of the satellite dish antenna, the existing television antennas be removed. (Staff report.) September 30, 1987 Page 3 ..HEARING EXAMINER'Si CISION RE: V-25-87 14. The Witness Lipscomb submitted that the condition requiring removal of television antennas is difficult because it will eliminate some reception of local television stations for residents of the apartment building. He indicated that Channels 9, 11 and possibly 4, 5 and 7 could be impacted and lost to the residents of the apartment building by the removal of the television antennas. (Lipscomb testimony.) 15. Approximately 100 people live in the apartment complex. Some of these individuals are elderly and on fixed incomes. If required to hook to the cable system in order to operate their televisions, the rents in the facility would be increased by $15 to $40 per month. This could create a significant burden on the tenants. (Lipscomb testimony.) 16. No public testimony was submitted at the hearing other than by Mr. Bowman and Mr. Lipscomb. CONCLUSIONS 1. The application is for the approval of a variance to exceed the 25-foot height limit on property located at 424 Third Avenue South, Edmonds, Washington. The requested variance is to exceed the permitted 25-foot height limit by an additional 20 feet. The building on site is a 35-foot building and it is the Applicant's intent to put a 10-foot satellite dish on the roof. 2. In order for a variance to be granted in the City of Edmonds the criteria as set forth in ECDC 20.85.010 must be satisfied. With conditions the criteria are satisfied by this request. 3. Special circumstances exist for the granting of a variance. Because of the age of the building and its location, a mesh - type antenna mounted on the ground would not be effective. The roof -top location is necessary to achieve the purpose of television reception. 4. The granting of a variance will not be the grant of a special privilege. The variance will allow 52 units within the apartment building on site to receive better quality television reception. 5. The requested variance satisfies the criteria of ECDC 20.85.010 and is compatible with the purposes and goals of the Comprehensive Plan as set forth in ECDC 15.20.010 et seq. 6. The requested variance is compatible with the zoning designation of RM-2.4 and is not in conflict with the purposes as set forth in ECDC 16.30.000. It is compatible in that it will provide a use which will complement the multiple residences on site. September 30, 1987 Page 4 HEARING EXAMINER'S r e,ISION RE: V-25-87 7. The requested variance does not appear to create a significant impact to the public, nor to nearby private properties or improvements. The antenna will pose no aesthetic problems. 8. The requested variance is the minimum necessary for the Applicant to enjoy the use of his property. T,zrTcrnni Based upon the preceding Findings of Fact and Conclusions, and the testimony and evidence submitted at the public hearing it is hereby ordered that the requested variance for a roof -mounted satellite dish antenna to exceed the permitted 25 feet by an additional 20 feet on property located at 424 Third Avenue South, Edmonds, Washington, is granted. The variance (V-25-87) is granted subject to the following conditions: 1. The satellite dish antenna must comply with all Architectural Design Board requirements. 2. The Applicant is to remove all existing television antennas that are not necessary to ensure good reception of local television stations. If a television antenna is necessary to ensure local reception, the television antenna may remain. The Planning Department shall be given the authority to determine if good reception is available without the television antenna. Entered this 30th day of September, 1987, pursuant to the authority granted the Hearing Examiner under Chapter 20.100 of the Community Development Code of the City of Edmonds. ES M. DRISCOLL ring Examiner NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL Written appeals alleging specific error of fact or other grounds for appeal may be filed with the Planning Department, City of Edmonds, Civic Center, Edmonds, Washington, 98020, within fourteen days of the date of the Hearing Examiner's final action. In this matter any appeal must be received by the Department prior to 5:00 p.m. on October 14, 1987. September 30, 1987 Page 5 EXHIBIT 2 CITY OF EDMONDS HEARING EXAMINER APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE FILE# V DATE 2 FEE $125, 0-0 RECT # (p�f�pJr APO'S ✓ HEARING DATE: 3— 5 _g APPLICANT �►m ADDRESS_�. r) i CITY & ZIP C/�c,%c• �! fi0 2-0 PHONE_ % 7 03 7-5— INDICATE TYPE OR DEGREE OF INTEREST IN PROPERTY�gi �5Y- a LOCATION OR ADDRESS OF PROPERTY 7 6 "7 ?Ht U S U LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY —, Cc_ 2 7Lu1 "7 /-2E 3 1-- vesa VARIANCE REQUESTED: I FOR OFFICE USE ONLY: USE ZONE: g ZONING ORDINANCE REQUIREMENT: ��� Release/Hold Harmless Agreement The undersigned applicant, his heirs and assigns, in consideration for the City processing the application agrees to release, indemnify, defend and hold the City of Edmonds harmless from any and all damages and/or claims for damages, including reasonable attorneys' fees, arising from any action or inaction is based in whole or in part upon false, misleading or incomplete information furnished by the applicant, his agents or employees. Permission to Enter Subject Property The undersigned applicant grants his, her or its permission for public officials and the staff of the City of Edmonds to enter.the subject property for the purpose of inspection and posting attendant to this application. Signature of Applica Owner or Representative '�«`.',.•''� 1 J. �(�f� �'�nY,e..c......w...«.....�...a.�.lt xvuea.tu..�k2A.�,.',«�...i«.S..i ��.L«.vv.. ,.N......c..r.�a•v.a '. .� r ++ { YTY.�„-.. Chronology on Petrowitz June 14, 1985 Hal Reeves and Duane Bowman inspect site June 17, 1985 Mr. Petrowitz informed of problems with addition December 13, 1985 Jerry Saterlie writes letter informing Mr. Petrowitz for the need to obtain permits. February 3, 1986 Mary Lou Block sends letter to Mr. Petrowitz March 27, 1986 Mary Lou sends letter to Chet Bennett, Petrowitzs' Attorney, telling him to file necessary applications. Gives April 15, 1986 as deadline. May 5, 1986 Hal Reeves turns matter over to the City Attorney. February 4, 1987 Tom Petrowitz files variance application, #V-6-87. March 5, 1987 Hearing Examiner Hearing. March 31, 1987 Hearing Examiner issues decision denying variance request. April 1, 1987 Tom Petrowitz files appeal of Hearing Examiner decision. May 19, 1987 City Council holds hearing and upholds Hearing Examiner decision. June 9, 1987 City Council adopts findings of fact denying appeal. June 11, 1987 Findings sent to Tom Petrowitz. ��r DECLARATIONS OF APPLICANT Please answer all questions 1. What are the physical characteristics, (i.e. topography, shape of lot, etc.) which create a hardship for you in regard to development of your property? 2. How does your property differ from other property in the same vicinity? r� � � Zlc- 3. Will this variance be detrimental to the public or damaging to other,� /property or improvements in the vicinity? 4. What hardships will result to you if the variance is not granted? Will these hardships have been caused by your own action? 5. Can you make re 'onable u e of y r proper t)Pwit out the variance? �. f �P �, y e �'� s o G � y c ��•�'.:� 6��'`'/ C` cC �. t %�-�- �i ��ey�-�lY�-�--� .1 �'7�c.�-e l -4� 0 TOM PETROWITZ ANSWERS FOR DECLARATIONS OF APPLICANT 1. This small 793 square foot house was built in 1940, apparently prior to the time of any zoning law in the City of Edmonds. There is also a detached garage of some 200 square feet which apparently was built at the time of the original construction of the house. Furthermore, there is an enclosed patio area which extends to the south of the house which was apparently built at the time of the original construction. Parts of the house, garage and patio enclosure area were built very close to the north and south property lines. Under the existing zoning laws, part of the house, garage and patio enclosure areas are in the setback requirement area of the current zoning for this area. Special circumstances which create hardship in this case include, but are not limited to, the following: a. Special circumstances have been, in part, created by the fact that I justifiably believed I did not need a variance or permit for the work in the patio area. Though the City of Edmonds denies it now, Jerry Saterlie, a City Official in the Building Department, did, in fact, state to me in the presence of witnesses (Erik Johnson, Randy Duncan, and two clerks for the City) that if I got a particular permit for my satelite dish, I did not need to get permits or applications to do anything with the City regarding the remodeled patio area, in that it was really a modification of an existing structure. I relied on this statement, and spent time and money (approximately $7,000.00) immediately thereafter and completed my work of remodeling this area. Thinking back now, I am sure that Mr. Saterlie should not have told me what, in fact, he did. However, he did, on my word, make such a statement. I relied on his statement to my detriment. I have no particular ill feelings for Mr. Saterlie or the City, but I just wish to try and work this problem out with the City and resolve my dilemma. All along since the spring of 1985, I have been trying to solve my dilemma and to either get the City not to require that I have a variance, or to work with the City to apply for this variance and get it approved as is, or to work with the City and apply for this variance and get it approved conditionally on making certain minimal changes. All along, I have tried to work with the City, have been to . �..ws .... a ..... ..., ,......... x . _..w.m ....._.. J ..0 .+ .....fM1lY.v...u..rY era! ..f.,.L,.._ ... ........ 0 the Building Department, have been to see the Mayor, have been to talk with the City Council, have been to see Mary Lou Block, have been to see Duane Bowman, and have used the assistance of my local counsel. I have numerous times offered and been willing that certain conditions be imposed upon approval of the variance. I have suggested to the City to minimize the effect of the addition to a nonconforming building, if any, that I would agree to a variance granted conditioned on the fact that I, immediately prior to the next sale of this property, would demolish and remove the entire patio area. This would be one way to guarantee to the City of Edmonds that I would not continue the effect of a nonconforming use indefinitely. 20.85.010 of subsection A, of the Community Development Code of Edmonds deals specifically with "special circumstances" and gives a list of non -inclusive items which could create special circumstances. That same subsection also gives a list of circumstances which do not constitute "special circumstances". My situation, as far as statements made to me by a City Official which I relied on, do not fall into either list. Therefore, I believe that my situation should be considered a special circumstance. When a citizen of the City of Edmonds is innocently, negligently, or intentionally mislead by statements into believing a fact and relies on such fact(s) to his detriment, it just is not fair that this citizen should be treated without some special due regard and compassion and that the City code should not be strictly enforced in this particular situation. b. The fact that the drainage water from the condominium asphalt parking lot area directly to the south of this property drains directly onto this property and did flood the patio area is a physical characteristic which created and still creates a hardship with regard to the subject property. Part of the work of completely enclosing the patio area was to end this water problem. To require the removal of all this work will result in the flooding of the patio area at the first rain and will not allow us to enjoy the use of the patio area. The natural drainage layout of the subject property in conjunction with the adjoining south side property naturally flows into the patio area such that it is the topography itself that in part has created a hardship in this case which should warrant the issuance of this variance. t C. The fact that this house was built so small and on such a small lot has created a hardship in itself. The house is 793 square feet, the garage 200 square feet on a lot of only 6,135 square feet. Had the builder anticipated a problem with future zoning laws he could have built a bigger more modern home on a bigger lot. This is not the situation of an act of a past owner/builder but more so the result of a City who has passed a zoning code. The fact that the previous owner builder built this next to the property line in a now deemed setback area is, again, a result of the Cities action and not of the previous owner/builder. This in itself creates a hardship and special circumstance which should warrant the allowance of a variance in this case. d. The fact that the previous existing patio area was only semi -enclosed creates a hardship in that it has been and was easily accessible for theft of property which is and has been stored in this area. Other owners of property around the area in the City of Edmonds are and have enclosed similar areas and are able to store property without the threat of having items stollen. Once again, a special circumstance has been created to me in my inability to properly safeguard my property as other owners are allowed. e. The small size of this home and the ability of its owners to enjoy year long recreation will be hindered with the forced removal and demolition of this enclosed patio area. Recreational uses are permitted uses in the RM1500 zones and this patio area has been used for such purposes in addition to storage purposes from the time of the original completion of the building. Other properties in the area enjoy the ability to recreate year long and to deny this ability to do so in this case creates a hardship for the owners of such a small home. 2. This property is different from other property in the same vicinity in that: a. The house is very small in comparison to others in the area and in comparison to the relative lot sizes. b. Other properties in the area have enclosed garages and patio areas too and it is my belief they have done so without acquiring variances and permits. C. Other properties, as far as I can tell, do not have water drainage problems which limit the use of their property as the water drainage problems which this property has. d. Other properties, as far as I can tell, do not have a lack of safe storage space as in this particular case. 3. No. a. This total enclosure of the patio improves, if anything, the surrounding properties. The improvements enhance the former look of the subject property thereby enhancing the look of the neighborhood. b. The neighbor to the north, (Mrs. Alma, an elderly woman) has stated to me that she has less problem with noise generated from the subject property now, with the completely enclosed patio area, than before when the recreational activities took place in the living room which is closer in proximity to her property. 4. Yes, hardships will result as I have listed in answer four of the application. No, these hardships have not been caused by my action. 5. No. I will not be able to make a reasonable use of my property without the variance for the following reasons, including, but not limited to: a. I will be deprived of a basic recreational use of my property which others enjoy in the surrounding properties. b. I will be deprived of the ability to maintain a safe and theft free storage space in this patio area, as others enjoy in the surrounding nearby properties. C. I will be deprived of the water drainage into an area which I will be deprived of such enjoy. the ability to control of my regular use in property as others so t STATEMENT OF TOM PETROWITZ IN SUPPORT OF APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE In the summer of 1984 when my mother and stepfather (who are the owners of the property in question) were here visiting, we used to use the patio for entertaining because the house is very small and we had a lot of company, and as the evening approached it would get cold and windy, so we would all have to go inside where it was cramped. One day we were talking about totally enclosing the patio area and I said I could do that without a great deal of expense. We all agreed it was a good idea. With soring heat costs as they are, we also agreed that it would help cut down on the electric bill, besides preventing dirt and leaves to accumulate in this patio enclosure area. I used to park a car in this patio enclosure area during the winter months. So in the spring of 1985, I hired a carpenter along with myself to enclose the front of the patio. There was no mention of a permit because the carpenter said he was not adding anymore footage but just updating what was there. About this time, I was also interested in purchasing and installing a satelite dish. I had been having problems with the local cable company and finally decided to discontinue their services. I bought a satelite dish, installed it in the front yard, which was the only place it could be intalled in order to work properly. About a week after installing the dish, I found a card left from the City of Edmonds by a Mr. Jerry Saterlie. On the card, he asked me to contact him about the dish and what they called a room addition, ie., patio enclosure area. I went to the City the next morning with two friends and contacted Jerry Saterlie, and asked why I needed a permit for an antenna. They brought out the various code books and really did not know what to do with me or with the dish. Apparently, they finally classified the dish as a fence post, I guess, and they indicated I had to conform with the setback requirements. This did not seem to make any sense to me, however, I then asked additionally about whether I needed a permit for the patio area. Mr. Saterlie said, at first, that he thought it was an addition. I then told him tl l that it was an existing semi -enclosed patio with a pre-existing outside framed wall and an existing roof and that all I was doing and had done was to enclose it for various reasons. He asked me some questions about it, for instance, whether I had added any more width or length to it for which I said no. He then said that all I was doing was updating an existing structure. I agreed. He then told me if I would get a permit for the dish that they would let the patio area go as I was not adding anymore area to it. I agreed and asked questions following -up about the dish. After having drawn various prints and maps about what I was going to do with the dish, he took my money and had a meeting in which the satelite dish and its installation were approved. Shortly thereafter, I installed the dish on the roof as approved and then called the City for final inspection. An inspector was supposed to come by at 9:30 on that particular Tuesday, however, never showed up. About two weeks later, I got a letter from the City indicating that I had to get a variance and a building permit for the patio within one week or they would turn it over to the City Prosecutor. At that time, I went to City Hall within the week and picked up an Application for variance. I started to read it and did not like what I saw with all the signing of waivers and the requirements of drawing more maps and getting signatures of the property owners within 80 feet including requiring me to make a trip to the City of Everett to get those names, etc. At that time, I was really disgusted with the City of Edmonds in leading me on to believe that I could continue to finish and maintain the semi -enclosed patio area. After my relying on such statements, I had spent considerable time and money remodeling only to receive threatening letters from the City indicating that I need to tear out all the work that I had completed. At that point, I contacted a local attorney. Subsequently, Mr. Saterlie and apparently one of his associates came over one morning and said that they were here but did not want to be. They indicated to me that they wished to do more research on the patio enclosure area. About a week later, I received a letter once again threatening that I had to either tear out the work or immediately apply for a variance. Though the City of Edmonds and apparently Mr. Saterlie deny ever giving me permission to continue with my of the patio area, I do have two witnesses a Johnson and Mr. Randy Duncan who were present at and overheard the same conversation that I had Saterlie. Additionally, I believe there were two also overheard that conversation. At any rate, I to take a polygraph test at any time and any place. enclosing Mr. Erik that time d with Mr. clerks who am willing One should note, in reviewing this Application for Variance, that my neighbor to the « , Mrs. Alma who had previously complained of noise gen $ateg at this residence has now agreed that it is a major improvement to have this patio enclosure area as a year round recreational room in that now it is much quieter for her. One should further note that, there are many other properties similarly situated near the subject property on fourth avenue in which those properties have garages or patios on the property lines, and within the setback areas. Furthermore, one should note that the construction and completion of the condominium units to the south of this property where the asphalting of the driveway occurred did create a serious water drainage problem which forced most, if not all, of such water down directly into the patio area. Part of the work which we have now completed on this patio enclosure area relieved us of the problem in keeping the water out of the patio area. Jim �rG TOM PETROWITZ `;I >,lr:'^ t y .':1; lAk�;%kt"a:'mLd`i'•2brii,hm..uL-n.:.�eftii�stxOros.:.Aar%u.+u.2cRReitracw:xd.rl.cNl,a#.ai�wfiiaaiaAawsfL:3�& .. ...an tY`, ra"" 7"i i�5h., �;3 a {•N V,fl.�':R'iittl�,.:jw'da STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss. COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH ) On this day personally appeared before me TOM PETROWITZ, to me known to be the individual described in and who executed the within and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he signed the same as his free and voluntary act and deed, for the uses and purposes thereinmentioned. GIVEN under my hand and official seal this day of February, 1987. No ary Public in and for the State of Washington Residing at Edmonds i' I y`. ��� .• jj • .u.0 .?:t:7•.7i. 'I Id 't'Sn�;u�a'•ER5 •.:[G;•" t i ;. . �._... • .....t�rw......+t t:$iA;«3LLn a.s.w,.:di:�......i ..:�itt°.4'.�=..++.i:l/2� �aa.W a.ate.+6..;ir1~x.i d_=.-.:i.. u.. .' .(:,t ._wL�� :..�v.':®.. a+...:......�L,vl.,....:.�.G..t...............w.l.ia...14...v.•_.:...tia�.G6t.......n.:.L:..w..�..i........u. w...:e4..�.,.:.1.� . ...... . b... • s • ,fie ,,�ee��1��e• �'��� EXHIBIT 3 it t h e Feu,«. e�. �4-��o fz�5 Cc:�lWf ° o ° �4 gal L . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (So, S "xlS��� �0s/ Pec E'�a.�Tiq, �. .�. a� vc2S 2 13 �P �� 000 /'4 Lid e cl I •� ..00 !I 1.7 EMBIT 4 DATE MOVED VALUATION ACRES OR LOT NUMBER LAND BLDG INITIAL DATE .... ... ... SALES DATA SALE DATE INSTRUMENT RECEIPT NUNIBER s T T P I CT 7 R REG 3 10.9FT F, 1.63.71FT W CF :C, T14 W 122.71PT TH N 51",PT TH F: TN S 510FT TO Prlirl ----------------------------------- Id, --------------- -1 (,n -7 rr CON W aii Y, rig i I r� � '.. .,..a� ._........ ....,......_.. _.._.._._.._�. .. ... ..... ... :.`. L, LNG LAND I SD �, FM 02 ❑ REVAL 85 04k,3/85 G4/15/85 ACCOUNT NO 23c ,03-4•-122—t70t]4 P/P NO TYPE SITUS: NBA --26Z — — — — — UNIT # _----- PRE —_ STREET 4TH--------_— TYPE AV. SUF S__ CITY EDMONDS-- ------ zIP 0802 ----- CT 5"IS •YD SEC—TWP—RNG 2q2-7G,`3-4 \ WTRFT 1 BUSINESS NAME BUILDING NO OCCUPANCY CONSTRUCTION 1 OF 1 RESIDENTIAL DATE BUILT REMODEL DATE CONDITION EFFECTIVE AGE 194E AVERAGE 45 % UNFINISHED HEIGHT MULT PERIM MULT BUILDING LIFE QUALITY BEDROOMS # ]t FLOOR COVER BUILT IN APPLIANCES AVG CPT / VN L RANGE —OVEN EXTERIOR FULL BATHS # 1 FLOOR CONST HOOD —FAN SIDING 3/4 BATHS # FRAME m 793 DISHWASHER ROOF TYPE 1/2 BATHS # CONC m GARB DISP PITCHED TRASH COMP ROOF COVER PLUMB FIX 6 HEAT —COOL MICROWAVE COMPOS WALL FOUNDATION FIREPLACE CONCRETE 1st FLR 793 BASEMENT GAR QUAL LC+W CP QUAL 2nd FLR DAYLITE EXTERIOR SIDING ROOF CVR 3rd FLR fL' POR DEV 7i ATTACHED .1 CP ID 4th FLR rJ QUAL FIN DETACHED 20C LOFT BASEMENT EL7 MEZZANINE COMMERCIAL BASEMENT YARD IMPROVEMENTS LIVING UNITS LOFT 111 UNFIN CL ASPH Mi TYPE iLI UNDEV CEILED CONC 21 STUDIO RETAIL 1 FINISHED IL' YD LT =P = F 1 SR RET—OFF lZl RETAIL f11 FENCE L/F 2 BR OFFICE TJ APT M 3 BR BANK m OFFICE 011 SPRINKLEDIE TOTAL BANK rE. FACTOR'.0 ELEVATOR LENGTH PARKING i' WIDTH PARK QUAL AVG HEIGHT PERIMETER _} .�/ LAND USE JJJQj S I P L A N D V L U A T I 0 N P R T I OANQUANTITY ACRES SITE UTILITY rFF 6.1: I 15 _ L/C O21L STYLE 1 S'IRY DEPRECIATION % 37 MARKET MODIFIER INTERCOM VACUUM EL GAR DR HOT TUB SAUNA PRCH QUAL L O W CONC 1 a a DECK Q7 BALC QI ROOF 01 2370 BUILDING VALUES PIP BLDG S O•If.1P $ COMM S F4MILY RE,. ZONING ED'': R'.�,-' ` TOTALS E A S . 14 C O n�c GEO100DIGIR C L O NEIG MESS PHv RD C U "JR It' 5 E S E P11GA N O VIEW ITR FRT T 1 DWTE ND LW O E S T PE 1 2 q 3 p 1 v �IOIyOILEWGELLRCK 2 y'{+1nGRP 1 2I 1 2 1 2 1 PWW 2 1 FOGP80K 2 3 a F 1 L 2 MH 3 LAND VALUE RATE 1 C1 7 TOTAL ASSESSED VALUE �s b4, 53; • �9 1 LIEN VALUE IS + �. ..: to 6 1� c (v VICINITY MA?)74 ` COO 4.1 EXHIBIT 5 r �r;�:j` �� • i •$' /\ ^° • to .,: •l.r ,lr• 0h .. W S Ij ,r a ,�y4• �� ' i q-(s V'T. LOT 7.50 AC . Q !1 C ' 0 6 /0Y., Cy/�, �,�\• �'b� a `� �. 1-045 / 059 \_ _ a►s 4l13a ' O 4 090 E.�:. C,A P I T A N /37 a5, 4. /2�[] �, r • .03< t,o A. 130 II9 4.052 4 1BQ , j 4-037 I i 6 A-ICOND. ,rJ� o!t 443 o g . • 08 4-053 94 30 IBe.51 4-C150 4-013 4'O'lO Eu - 4 •089 4-067 L! n 4' 4 � 4,083 4-454 D PU091u LI 4.084 4.056Tdi5 4 025 U) O �O PUB 60 • DAYTON ST• T+0�z �❑ a `-070I 4 093 f092 �' t Io �J ° ' E 126 210 4-0.57 4-058. 4.065 4-071 +077 I - ''^^ I to 3RD AV S �{�j co '1^•,,/ AC.ONt 4 UNITS 4-0 72/60 I/5 216 w .iC WA 6� . 126 ❑ Q 22 D 4-072 _> LL 2z2 7 4 053 TRE�i ME T PLANT Q 223 4.06 6 > 22r D 2le Q Q 4 O73 4-079 I W . j its 4.060 ff PLAN OF �115 232 23r4•ok r R �o. QQ 4 09h JASPER COND 727 061 � ,,a �s U) _ 180 .;=.'i: 00 I� 4fl6Z ri 54-068 a 4-076 4-0 0 p . UN DOWNER 230 ,�, ► 4-12,' v, A_COO. •15UNITS jv7 , - 75 242 4-rr7 4•r27 U ` J•` .i 1oe04 4TH AVE S e 9 AL DER S T.'T 3/ r3 ACONO,IZUNITS 124.+3 3y CD f/36 id0 4•120 C2 Q to 4 /05 °vw r T• W s 5 14446 THE MAYFIELO 4-/43 4 rZ9 4+ 1. ,p5 c Q 60 g A CONO. 4-/21 ti cn 10 0 6 0 4-130 "J oZ Q 14446 60 \ v W 9 • 7 o - f-/31 4•/07 4•l42 4•r19 d 4-037 Z �7 14+54 +3 ' a-!08 B. Q328 i 4-140 CHATEAU 4-/4/ =WESTP,s- 1<7. 4.035 4d56 rr0• r.W I N D Y A CONO °+ an a•r14 I + i ¢=/oo WALNUT ST. �' j' DOG . j 4•111 4•144 -H5 4.125 4 /0� 4•r35 30 30 4•//Z 4•+35'13O 6G 4.146 4•134 — f o • Il$ 4^rQ3 4•%OL,-._.�..-0 b�. I 0 ��... .---•-� EVERETT�CDPYRIGNTCO Ptl8LISMCD BY 12! 1 II 117 E 1 KROL MAP COMPANY, INC., �E:'+-Ti LE .I: 1 // OP r {� t t � ♦y .r 4k, ( �~ n..1.1r.. � T✓ 'e:... .. ;�.1.., .'iJ w.w..n.. n....�..a.[4 va sw a�.._e. ........va... . JF.. ale. .n .�.«�. .n ...... ... ....0 ��.. a. r. oJ. •.,.raai v. unt4 ✓._i .. Y._ Y fir.:' .�.:.✓..>...:..n..x�... ... L...nac.: .n.n a. ...nu .n ri .,. .,n: .r... .-�..vare.a :.. o'., ...r h EU IVED 1+11A,i 1987 Cl_TY OF. EDMOND!g c940 r 51 00 ado. o`d' 12 1� ca0 2.S , 1�2t•t�� ;Y 7,3 Ocor�oo v`i'J7 126 7 y _ sue. �- r .y, ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS LIST So, 2- 2 Y- A4- S 0 C b,Les Cie h 6 e, i- 310 - S -1;"' 14 ile .5 0. S-0' 4,v e so, eJ-0 Cla 4 5- 7S9 lei'l e, 0/y., q V S 17 e 9s6q"'- 7 spa C 1Z � 3 2 6 CL I e 1(i 'PS ATTIK A'44SCJ-D Ccz-hl-4 A7- 2 Sea:-Hke' On my oath, I certify that the -names and addresses provided represent all properties located within 80 feet of the subject property. Signature of Applicant or Ap cant's Representative Subscribed n. sworn to before me this /�/d a y of —a n N tary Public Vdor the State of Washington ; Residing at My COMMISSION EXPIRES 6e.1649, Tom Petrowitz 267-4th Ave. S. Edmonds, WA 98020 Eugene Nagy/Resident 271 4th Ave. S. Edmonds, WA 98020 Pioneer Bank Nagy, Eugene #02-52001668 4111-200th S.W. Lynnwood, WA 98036 Ethyl Fenton/Resident 261 4th Ave. S. Edmonds, WA 98020 Wi'lliam Hanson/Resident 275 4th Ave. S. Edmonds, WA 98020 Charles Deboer/Resident 316 5th Ave. S.. Edmonds, WA 98020 Allen Hendricks/Resident 402-5th Ave. S. Edmonds, WA 98020 Shoreline Savings Attn: Ausejo Caryl P.O. Box 25788 Seattle, WA 98125 Resident/Owner j 424-5th Ave. S. Edmonds, WA 98020 Echelbarger Co. Inc. P.O. Box 30 Lynnwood, WA 98046 Resident/Owner 420-5th Ave. S. Edmonds, WA 98020 John Dittman/Resident 272-4th Ave. S. Edmonds, WA 98020 Snohomish County PUD 2320 California Everett, WA 98201 Resident/Owner 251-4th Ave. S. Edmonds, WA 98020 0 w,. I • li RECEIVED City of Edmonds ' F (_ B 17 1981 'Gary McComas Fire M. INTER -OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE NGINEERING ' Bobby Mi 11 s P .W . zJerry Hauth/Dan Smith -Engineering Duane Bowman 2-17-87 TO FROM DATE SUBJECT v V-6-87 VARIANCE TO"REDUCE .REQUIRED SIDE SETBACK FROM.10' TO' 181 FOR PATIO FOR RESIDENCE AT 267-4TH AVENUE S. (RM 1.5) HEARING DATE:. .MARCH 5, 1987 PLEASE RESPOND WITH YOUR COMMENTS NO LATER THAN FEBRUARY 23, 1.987. SORRY FOR THE SHORT NOTICE. THANKS. 1 City of Edmonds M --�7-OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE g c Comas Fir IN erry-Hauth/.Dan Smith Engineering -17-87 Duane Bowman 2 TO FROM DATE ` y.6-87 VARIANCE TO -REDUCE -REQUIRED slOE SETBACK FROH]8'I �l8" / ' kM l,8) FOR PATIO FOR RESIDENCE 8T 267-4TH�AVENUE S. { ` ' HcARzN� DATE-, MARCH � l�87 , . ..[8Sc RESPOND WITH YOUR COMMENTS NO LATER THAN FE8kVAKY .23, 1Q87. . SORRY FOR THE SHORT NOTICE. U ' U THANKS. .RECL|VED FEB 18 1987 ` 1J..t t �•'. f ( V City of Edmonds Gary McComas` Fire M. INTER -OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE BobbyMill's`'':`P"W Jerry Hauth/Dan Smith - Engineering Duane Bowman 2-17-87 TO FROM DATE SUBJECT V-6-87 VARIANCE TO"REDUC.E.REQUIRED SIDE SETBACK FROM.10' T0-18" FOR PATIO FOR RESIDENCE AT 267-4TH AVENUE S. (RM 1.5) HEARI'N.G DATE:. -MARCH 5, 19.87 PLEASE RESPOND WITH YOUR COMMENTS NO LATER THAN FEBRUARY 23, 1.987. SORRY FOR THE SHORT NOTICE. THANKS. !- E8 1987 ,18 .A_UB�.�C WORKS CITY OF EDMONDS mo THE I WILL HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING `%Mt%gv19—�+'—f , ON THE FOLLOWING APPLICATION: FILE NO. 1p T7. PROPERTY ADDRESS AND LOCATION ZONE DISTRICT. ® to 0 w7ae THE HEARING WILL BEGIN AT M., IN THE PLAZA MEETING ROOM, LIBRARY BUILDING, 650 MAIN STREET, EDMONDS, WASHINGTON. IF YOU WISH TO COMMENT ON THIS PROPOSAL, YOU MAY COME TO THE HEARING AND SPEAK. YOU MAY ALSO WRITE A LETTER STATING YOUR VIEWS WHICH WILL BE CONSIDERED AT THE HEARING. PLEASE ADDRESS THE LETTER TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND INCLUDE THE ABOVE FILE NUMBER. IF THE ITEM IS CONTINUED TO ANOTHER HEARING BECAUSE THE AGENDA IS NOT COMPLETED, OR FURTHER INFORMATION IS NEEDED, THE DATE OF THE CONTINUED HEARING WILL BE ANNOUNCED ONLY AT THE MEETING. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION MAY BE OBTAINED AT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, 250 FIFTH AVENUE NORTH, EDMONDS (PHONE 771-3202, EXTENSION 252). THE REMOVAL, MUTILATION, DESTRUCTION, OR WAR CONCENING! OF THE AH HEARING S A LMENT OF THIS PUNISHABLE BY FINE AND IMPRISONMENT. THIS NOTICE MAY BE REMOVED AFTER MA&M 5d—?-77 POSLQO a n\oc&eQ1 `/23/g7 tit L; FILE NO. V - 6 - 8 7 APPLICANT Tom Petrowitz AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ss. COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH ) Susan Painter being first duly sworn, on oath deposesand says: That on the 2 3 r d day of February ' 19 87 the attached Notice of Public Hearing was mailed as required to adjacent property owners, the names of which were provided by the applicant. Sig ned ned Subscribed and sworn to before me this c=,Fd as-'� day of 19�. Notary Public in and for the State of Washington. Residing at-,f M COMMISSION EXPIRES 6.16.89 0 STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss. COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH ) Duane Bowman and says: FILE NO. V - 6 - 8 7 APPLICANT Tom Petrowitz AFFIDAVIT OF POSTER being first duly sworn, on oath, deposes That on the 2 3 r d day of February , 19 87 the attached Notice of Public Hearing was posted as prescribed by Ordinance, and in any event, in the Frances Anderson Center and Civic Center, and where applicable on or near the subject property. Signed Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of 19_ 0 Notary Public in and for the State of Washington. �7 Residing at .MY COMMISSION EXPIRES 6-16-89. a THIS PACKET SENT TO HEARING -- EXAMINER ON FEBRUARY 27, 1987 EXHIBIT LIST V-6-87 EXHIBIT 1 - STAFF REPORT EXHIBIT 2 - APPLICATION/DECLARATIONS EXHIBIT 3 - PLOT PLAN EXHIBIT 4 - ASSESSOR RECORDS EXHIBIT 5 - VICINITY MAP EXHIBIT 1 STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER FILE: V-6-87 HEARING DATE: March 5, 1987 I. REQUESTED ACTION: Variance to reduce the required 10' south side yard setback to 18" to allow an addition onto the existing residence at 267 4th Ave. S., Edmonds. II. APPLICANT/OWNER: Tom Petrowitz 267 4th Avenue South Edmonds, WA 98020 III. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: See Exhibit 2 IV. STAFF FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: A. Description of the Subject Property and Surrounding Area The subject property is located on the east side of 4th Ave. S. The lot contains approximately 6,135 sq. ft. of area. There is an existing older home located on the property. The house was built in 1940, along with a small garage. A patio was built along the south side of the house and was a cover was apparently built over it a number of years ago. In 1985, the Applicant erected a satellite dish antenna and enclosed the patio area, converting the area to additional living space. The City notified the Applicant of the need to obtain a building permit and a variance in order to do the remodel work on the patio. The Applicant is now seeking a variance to reduce the required 10' south side yard setback to 18" to allow the improvements to the patio area to remain. Surrounding development is a mixture of commercial, multiple family and single family development . B. Official Street Map Proposed R/W Existing R/W West - 4th Ave. S. 60' 60' East - Alley 16' 16' �i:...s....�._...Yy........... ....�.a�L... __,...._...»._.. ...,.,..... _....�1 __. v.. a__�a a.....r_....�o-,...... .._.... .,. ...� .+....vu..rM1x �.....�...a.��......v_... «.......,......., _...... _..es...J ...Lwa+.a .1_.............._..�..w.ua�..0 a._..w_..,..aar..u.Lxa'Tk..., _.. _, Staff Report V-6-87 C. Conformance to Chapter 20.85.010 1. Special Circumstances Page 2 No unique circumstances exist in this particular case. 2. Special Privilege The proposed variance does appear to represent a grant of special privilege. Other properties in the area may or may not have done work with or without permits, but this has no bearing on the issue of this variance. 3. Comprehensive Plan The Comprehensive Policy Plan map designates the subject property as Commercial Business, as are the adjacent properties. The proposed variance does appear to conflict with the purposes of the Comprehensive Plan. The development in question crowds the south property line and provides inadequate separation from the property to the south. 4. Zoning Ordinance The subject property, as well as the surrounding property to the north, south, and west, is zoned RM-1.5. To the east is BC zoning. The proposed variance does appear to conflict with the purposes of the zoning ordinance and the RM-1.5 zone district. The purpose of having setbacks in to insure proper separation between buildings and uses. By having the living space right on the south property line, any noise occurring in that area will adversely impact the south property owner. A further concern is the possibility of fire hazard. 5. Not Detrimental If conditioned, the proposed variance does not appear to pose any significant impact to the public or to any near by private property or improvement. 6. Minimum Variance The requested variance does not appear to represent a minimum variance request. 0 E.m 2 T�`^.;..._.._.:.....•-----'�---'�--=•---------`-- ,. ;' :•' • '`" L•-.,,.:,..t'.3sd uu...:.._...,.,..,,c..:,...a,.......w._nil.....:_:..s,,.,w.:.,.,......,.,.....::.:'.»..u,�....ay�.ww..:,:.:... Staff Report l ' Page 3 V-6-87 V. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Applicant contends that the City mislead him to do the work that he has done. His charge has been vehemently denied by the official named by the Applicant. It is regrettable that the Applicant has spent money and time trying to improve his property, only to find that he may lose all of his improvements. However, staff cannot support the approval of V-6-87. The variance does not meet all the variance criteria. Should the Hearing Examiner decide to grant the variance, it should be subject to the following condition: 1. Obtain a Building Permit for all work done on the addition and comply with all requirements of the Uniform Building Code, 1985 edition.. 4 t�. r AAkan PLEASE PRINT YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS BELOW IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS'' ITEM AND/OR WISH TO RECEIVE A COPY OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S FINDINGS OF FACT V-6-87 TOM PETROWITZ Variance to reduce the required 10' side yard setback to 18" to allow a residential addition at 267 4th Avenue S. NAME ADDRESS ` f I�02j s, t. f _j R EC E I V ED A CITY QF EDM0.NQ$, LARRY S. NALIGHTEN CITY OF E13MONDS MAYOR 250 5th AVE. N. • EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 98020 • (206) 771.3202 fkrlr^':% HEARING EXAMINER F'I*NDTNGS AND DECISIONS 01.0 THE HEARING EXAMINER OF' THE CITY OF' EDMONDS TN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION FILE: OF TOM PETROWITZ FOR APPROVAL OF A VARIANCE D ' I', ECISION: They va.rianr--e is denied. INTROD[IC"'ION Tom Petrowitz, 2671 - 4-th Avenue S, Edmonds, Washingtori, 980:20, 1. (bercAnafter -re*F0-!'r-*(..,d to as Applicant), has requc-.:_;1tD,(4 , approval of Ej w:Iriwice for -, redu.cLion of a side yard setk,a,,-.�k on pt:*opert:y loc,,-:tted at 267 ­ It-.b Avc.�riue S, Edwands, Washington. The s-C..)ecific request of the Applicant is for a reduction o' the x-equired, 10 foot side yard sc�tljack on the south side of the SUbject. 8 inch scutback. A :searing on thE-! WO-S proj.-)erty -to an I held before the iu: irinl:,:16 L.,;xatidner the, C:LL-.y of E,J';r'0u(1!i:, oil March 5, 1987. At the hearing the. f-ollow-ing presented testimony ;Jnd (--,,v_J_dence: Dulane Bovaran Tom Petrowitz P.I. a n n - ing oe�pcictment 267 -- 4tll Ave. S' City of Edmonds Edmond!:;, WA 98020 E(�,njcvtids, WA 98020 At the hearing the fol*1owing exhibits were sub-mitte-d umd admiti-ed cis oall: of t:he: of!:jcjuj record of these proceeding.,;: Exhib 4 t I SLaff Roport L 2 A -pp 1i ca t. i o n / De c lorations r,] o t P.1 a n ss A c- s s c) r Re c or ds 5 - vicinity Mari 6 - '1?110t.0g.raphs before ov-cme.�% t s 7 C)* Property I.,J. n e 3 I.,hotoo-rapIls of Fence. at Condov,.in ium Phot.-.ograph .,If for Irnprovellic-,nos made INCORPORATED AUGUST 11, 1 BSO HEARING EXAMINER Petrowitz Exhibit 10 - Tax Assessments for and 1987 " 11 - Labor and Material for Improvements On FINDINGS OF FACT •:. Costs Site 1. The Applicant has requested a variance for the reduction of a side yard setback at 267 - 4th Avenue S, Edmonds, Washington. Specifically the Applicant is asking for a reduction from the required 10 foot side yard setback to an 18 inch setback in order to allow an addition on to an existing residence on -site. The addition has been built. (Staff Report & Bowman testimony) 2. The subject property is on the east side of 4th Avenue South. It is a 6,135 square foot lot on which exists an older home that was built in 1940. There is also a small garden on - site. A patio was added on to the south side of the existing home and was covered. The patio is within the side yard setback and the Applicant has never acquired a variance for its construction or coverage. (Bowman testimony) 3. The subject property is zoned RM 1.5. The Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) 16.30.030A establishes side setbacks for RM. 1.5 zones as 10 feet. The Applicant seeks a variance from this standard. (Staff Report, ECDC) 4. In order for a variance to be granted within the City of Edmonds, the criteria as set forth in ECDC 20.85.010 must be satisfied. These criteria include: A. Because of the special circumstances relating to -the property, the strict enforcement of the zoning ordi- nance would deprive the owner of use rights and privileges permitted to other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning. B. 'The approval of the variance would not be a grant of special privilege to the property in comparison with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning. C. The approval of the variance will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Edmonds. D. The approval of -the variance will be consistent with the purposes of the zoning ordinance and the zone district in which the property is located. E. The variance as approved or conditionally approved will not be significantly detrimental to the public -2- 0 .�'..b,.....,,i..a.u�..,..t�.�...,.,.<ta._....,:,.i....�k.....r..a..........,_... '...t,:.-aac..... .,.aw.._.., �.w,.,.»a...,... t,�...,w�xi.w,...-.....;k. _........�-n..:.... ... .<. .............. ......,.. ,... .-....__.�_u......r.� _._..�....».n .. ,. ..,,.. ,_, HEARING EXAMINER RE: Petrowitz 1 health, safety and welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and same zone. F. The requested variance is the minimum necessary to allow the owner the rights enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning. (ECDC.) 5. The patio on the subject property is located on the south side of the property. The adjacent property is developed as a condominium. According to the Applicant, the patio was built and coverage of the patio was constructed for the purpose of providing privacy to the subject property and the muffling of any noises that would impact the adjoining property. (Petrowitz testimony) 6. From the testimony and evidence submitted at the public hearing it does not appear that special circumstances relating to the property exist to warrant granting the variance. The Appli- cant has enclosed the patio area that is located in a setback for the purpose of creating more privacy for the residence on site. (Bowman testimony) 7. The City submitted that the requested variance would repre- sent the grant of a special privilege. (Bowman testimony) 8. The comprehensive policy plan map of the City of Edmonds designates the subject property as commercial business. The City submitted that the requested variance would conflict with the purposes of the comprehensive plan as set forth in Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC). (Staff Report, Bowman testimony) 9. The City submitted that the requested variance would conflict with the purposes of the zoning ordinances and the purposes of the RM 1.5 zone district. It would conflict according to the City because there. would not be the proper separation between buildings and uses in this particular zone. (Bowman testimony) 10. The City did submit that the requested variance is not detrimental to other properties in the area. (Bowman testimony) 11. The City recommended denial of the variance request. (Staff Report) 12. The Applicant submitted that the patio was enclosed for the purpose of providing more privacy for the residents of the house on -site. Also the Applicant submitted that the enclosure muffles noises emanating from the house and it is a benefit to the adjoining property. (Petrowitz testimony) -3- 0 I ■ HEARING EXAMINER R( Petrowitz 13. The Applicant submitted special circumstances do exist because he did the construction work for the enclosure with the belief that no variance was required. According to the Applicant, this belief was based on information provided him by City officials. (Petrowitz testimony) 14. The Applicant submitted that the drainage from the condomi- nium's parking lot drains into the southern portion of the subject property and floods the patio area. As a result of this drainage the use of the patio area is prohibitive and this warrants the granting of a variance. (Petrowitz testimony, Exhibit 2) 15. The Applicant submitted that the patio area that was not closed created a problem for the occupants of the residence on - site because it was easily acccessible for theft of goods stored in the area. (Petrowitz testimony, Exhibit 2) 16. The Applicant submitted that other owners of properties in the area have enclosed areas that are similar to the subject property and are able to store their material goods in these areas wi.thout the threat of theft. (Exhibit 2) 17. The Applicant submitted that the subject property is small in comparison to other properties in the area and does not have a detrimental impact upon other properties in the area. (Petrowitz testimony) 18. The Applicant submitted that his mother and stepfather are the owners of -the subject property and use the patio for enter- tainment purposes. Because of the small nature of the residence on -site, the enclosed patio is a useful addition. (Petrowitz testimony) CONCLUSIONS 1. The applicationis for the approval of a variance, for a re- duction of a side yard setback on property located at 267 - 4th Avenue S, Edmonds, Washington, 98020. The requested setback is for a reduction of the required 10 feet to a setback of 18 inches in order to allow an addition of an existing residence to remain on site. 2. In order for a variance to be granted within the City of Edmonds, criteria as set forth in ECDC 20.85.010 must be satisfied. This application has failed to satisfy that criteria. 3. No special circumstances have been shown for the granting of a variance. In particular the circumstances as set forth in ECDC 20.85.010A are missing in this application. QZ 1 1 1 is HEARING EXAMINER RE: ,)etrowitz 4. The grant of this variance would be -the grant of a special privilege to the Applicant. 5. The granting of the requested variance does not appear to con- flict with the comprehensive policy plan designation of community business. The provisions of ECDC 15.20.010 appear satisfied by the application. 6. The requested variance does not appear to conflict with ECDC 16.30.000 which is the section setting forth the purposes for RM zoned properties. 7. The requested variance does not appear to be detrimental to other properties or have a significant impact on the public, nor to other properties or improvements. 8. The requested variance appears to be the minimum variance request. n VOTCTnM Based upon the preceding Findings of Fact and Conclusions; the testimony and evidence submitted at the public hearing; and, upon the impressions of the Hearing Examiner at a site view; it is hereby ordered that the requested variance for a reduction of the side yard setback from 10 feet to 18 inches at 267 - 4th Avenue S, Edmonds, Washington is denied. The basis of this denial is as follows: 1. In order for a variance to be granted within the City of Edmonds the criteria as set forth in ECDC 20.85.010 must be satisfied. All of the criteria must be satisfied. The present application in- volves a difficult situation. The Applicant has enclosed a patio, which is located in the side yard setback. The enclosure was made prior to the variance request. However, the criteria for the review of the variance must still be applied. From the review it would appear that all of the criteria except for the showing of special circumstances necessary for the granting of a variance and the showing of a lack of a special privilege have been met. 2. The Applicant failed to provide adequate testimony or evidence to show special circumstances exist for the granting of a variance. From the testimony and the evidence submitted it appears the main reason for the variance and the enclosure is to provide privacy for the residents on site. This in and of itself is not a special cir- cumstance necessitating a variance. It is a special privilege being granted to the Applicant. 3. Even though the Applicant has already constructed the enclosure, it is subject to review. It is subject to the same review as if -5- I UEARING EXAMINER RE 'etrowitz no construction had occurred. With the lack of special circumstances and the determination that a 'variance would be a special privilege to the Applicant, the variance must be denied. The Applicant must remove the enclosure. 4. The drainage problem of the condominium adjacent to the pro- perty does not warrant the granting of a variance. This would appear to be a problem that must be resolved by the condominium owners. It is recommended that the Applicant consult with the necessary city departments to ensure that the condominium property is drained pro- perly. If, after significant research and investigation, it is determined that the condominium can not be drained in any other manner except onto the Applicant's property then a variance may be warranted. However, an additional hearing must be held on that particular issue. Entered this �_l day of March, 1987, pursuant to -the authority granted -the Hearing Examiner under Chapter 20.100 of the Community Development Code of the City of Edmonds. rGHTTO DRISCOLL Examiner NOTICE OF APPEAL Written appeals alleging specific error of fact or other grounds for appeal may be filed with the Planning Department, City of Edmonds, Civic Center, Edmonds, Washington, 98020, within fourteen days of the date of the Hearing Examiner's final action. In this*matter any appeal must be received by the Department prior to 5:00 p.m. on April 14, 1987. i ....... ... ..._<... i. _ ..... .. ... .,:.�.._.�.... ._.._ _. .....,...,.>_..w4�._w...3,. �..�.. L:...u..,L.�..l ...,........'.... ,... ....ef... u;.i:,:.,.......v.. ,....+........,._...._......_..�.�...,.. �...«.,�:.:u.__ai.� .... .. .. ..1_.:c:. 2 0 Af''i7 OJI OF EDAMONDSe ' EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO Item number: Originator: Planning Division For Action: X For Information: SUBJECT: SET DATE FOR HEARING ON APPEAL OF HEARING EXAMINER DECISION REGARDING VARIANCE FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 267-4TH AVENUE S. (AP-6-87/APPELLANT: TOM PETROWITZ) (SUGGESTED DATE: MAY 19, 1987) Clearances: Dept./Indiv./Initials AGENDA TIME: Consent ADMIN SVCS/FINANCE AGENDA DATE: April 21, 1987 CITY ATTORNEY CITY CLERK EXHIBITS ATTACHED: COMMUNITY SERVICES ENGINEERING 1. Appeal Letter PARKS ION CR PLANNING PUBLIC W K FIRE PERSONNEL POLICE COMMITTEE MAYOR COMMENTS: EXPENDITURE AMOUNT APPROPRIATION REQUIRED: $ 0 BUDGETED: $ 0 REQUIRED: $ 0 HISTORY AND SUMMARY STATEMENT: On March 31, 1987, the Hearing Examiner denied a request by Tom Petrowitz to grant approval of a variance for a reduction of a side yard setback on property located at 267-4th Avenue S. Subsequently, on April 14, 1987, Mr. Petrowitz filed an appeal seeking to overturn the Hearing Examiner's decision. Attached is a copy of the appeal letter. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Set May 19, 1987 as the date to hear the appeal. PETROWTZ/COUNCIL 'ESE MINUTES SUBJECT TO RIL 28, 1987 APPROVAL EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES APRIL 21, 1987 The regular meeting of the Edmonds City Council was called to order at 7 p.m. by Mayor Pro Tem Wilson in the Plaza Meeting Room of the Edmonds Library. All present joined in the flag salute. PRESENT Jack Wilson, Council Pres. John Nordquist Steve Dwyer Laura Hall Jo -Anne Jaech Bill Kasper Lloyd Ostrom Tony Russell, Stud. Rep. ABSENT Larry Naughten, Mayor STAFF PRESENT Bobby Mills, Pub. Wks. Supt. Peter Hahn, Comm. Svc. Dir. Art Housler, Admin. Svc. Dir. Duane Bowman, Asst. City Planner Jack Weinz, Fire Chief Dan Prinz, Police Chief Bob Alberts, City Engineer Scott Snyder, City Attorney Gary McComas, Fire Marshal Margaret Richards, Recorder Mayor Pro Tem Wilson presided over the meeting in the absence of Mayor Naughten. CONSENT AGENDA Item (B) was removed from the Consent Agenda. COUNCILMEMBER OSTROM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEM- BER JAECH, TO APPROVE THE BALANCE OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED. The approved items on the Consent Agenda include the following: (A) ROLL CALL (C) AUTHORIZATION TO CALL FOR BIDS ON STORAGE AND MAINTENANCE BUILDING AT FIRE STATION 2 (D) SET MAY 5, 1987 FOR HEARING ON APPEAL OF ADB DECISION REQUIRING IRRIGATION FOR PROPOSED TOWNHOUSE AT 8017 - 212TH SW. S.W. (AP-5-87/APPELLANTS: PINNED & MICHEL, INC.) (E) SET JUNE 30, 1987 FOR HEARING ON HEARING EXAMINER RECOMMENDATION FOR PROPOSED 4 LOT SUBDIVISION AT APPROXIMATELY 1116 - 2ND AVE. S. (P-1-87/SEAWOODHOMES) (F) SET JUNE 30, 1987 FOR HEARING ON HEARING EXAMINER RECOMMENDATION TO VACATE UNDEVELOPED PORTION OF 1ST AVE. S., 230' NORTH OF ELM ST. TO SR 104 (ST-2-87/SEAWOOD HOMES) (G) SET MAY 19, 1987 FOR HEARING ON HEARING EXAMINER RECOMMENDATION TO AMEND OFFICIAL STREET MAP TO REDUCE PROPOSED RIGHT-OF-WAY OF 80TH PL. W., NORTH OF 212TH. ST. S.W. FROM 35' TO 25' (ST-3-87/CITY OF EDMONDS) (H) SET MAY 19, 1987 FOR HEARING ON APPEAL OF HEARING EXAMINER DECISION REGARDING VARIANCE FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 267 - 4TH AVE. S. (AP-6-87/APPELLANT: TOM PETROWITZ) (I) ADOPTION OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW REGARDING PROPOSED CONTRACT REZONE FROM RM-2.4 TO CG FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8009 - 238TH ST. S.W. (R-2-86/DIPANGRAZIO) APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF APRIL 14, 1987 [ITEM (B) ON THE CONSENT AGENDA] Councilmember Hall made the following additions: page 5, paragraph 5, "Councilmember Hall com- pared the building of the treatment plant to building a house. We don't need to hire a special design architect for drainage of pipes and plumbing"; page 7, paragraph 10, "Councilmember Hall indicated that we have had hearings in the past on small neighborhood issues but something of this magnitude is being neglected as to getting public input. Also, the public needs to know what is happening --what is going on regarding this facility"; page 8, paragraph 3, "The books on AIDS are available in the library". Councilmember Kasper made the following additions: page 7, paragraph 12, "The public has never been informed of the Culp analysis of the cost of going to Harbor Square being less than Union Oil". COUNCILMEMBER HALL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER KASPER, TO APPROVE THE MINUTES AS AMENDED. MOTION CARRIED. 0 `....w...,l�:..�b��.tti4.s_�...w.a..............._,.._.'A..�.a......_.a.w�...: ....�. .....-v......�._.. _. .... .._ .... ,... .! .......«.._.,.._._...........�...+,.,_._n....Yi, ._......e. .....::1.i..1..�..�" ��al. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO Item number: Ori inator: Planning Division For Action: X For Information: SUBJECT: HEARING ON APPEAL OF HEARING EXAMINER DECISION REGARDING VARIANCE FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 267 4TH Ave. S. (AP-6-87/TOM PETROWITZ) Clearances: Dept. /Indiv./Initials AGENDA TIME: 30 Minutes ADMIN SVCS/FINANCE CITY ATTORNEY AGENDA DATE: May 19, 1987 CITY CLERK COMMUNITY SERVICES EXHIBITS ATTACHED: ENGINEERING PARKS & RECREATION 1. Appeal Letter PLANNING PUBLIC WORKS 2. Hearing Examiner Report FIRE - PERSONNEL 3. Vicinity Map POLICE COMMITTEE 4. Plot Plan MAYOR COMMENTS: EXPENDITURE AMOUNT APPROPRIATION $0 REQUIRED: 50 BUDGETED: $0 REQUIRED: HISTORY AND SUMMARY STATEMENT: In 1985, the Building Division discovered an addition that was made to the residence at 267 4th Ave. S. The addition was built without a permit and is within 18" of the south side yard. The City initiated proceedings to require the property owner to either remove the addition or obtain a variance and building permit. On March 5,1987, the Hearing Examiner held a public hearing on the variance request of Tom Petrowitz to reduce the required south side yard setback for the addition to the house at 267 4th Ave. S. from 10' to 18". The Hearing Examiner, on March 31, 1987, issued his decision denying the variance request. Subsequently, on April 14, 1987, Mr. Petrowitz filed an appeal seeking to overturn the Hearing Examiner's decision. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Uphold the Hearing Examiner's decision. COUNCIL ACTION: 0 W. ��-�:. ..� ... _. .. _-..eA ._ u�.. .,.. ,. .. _ ....... _........ a..... ._...... ...-..d... ., .. _....[; u..r. a.w.». a..wk:-wl lQ�ru .im nl.•a.. a.. .w... ..�... �..>... �.. �»�. ._. .. ...�.__w She said the City Council requested the Engineering Division to prepare a drawing reflecting a turnaround configuration at the northerly end of 7th Avenue South north of Elm Street. A copy of that drawing is attached to the Council packets. Ms. Block said it is the Planning Staff's recommendation to vacate the right-of-way as recommend- ed by the Hearing Examiner subject to retention of a ten foot pedestrian easement and the dedica- tion of the area required by the hammerhead turnaround, as shown on the City Engineer's drawing. Ms. Block referred to Exhibit B, noting that the preferred alternative was configuration B-1 because she said it would not impact the stream. She said properties on the right would have to access through the alley of Fir Street. COUNCILMEMBER KASPER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER HALL, TO ACCEPT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR A HAMMERHEAD TURNAROUND ON LOT 2 BEHIND THE LOTS ON FIR STREET AND TO ADOPT ORDINANCE 2620 VACAT- ING 7TH AVE. S. FOR 120 FEET SOUTH OF FIR BUT TO RETAIN A 10 FEET EASEMENT DOWN THE CENTER COMPRISED OF 5 FEET OFF THE EASTERLY PART AND 5 FEET OFF THE WESTERLY PART. MOTION CARRIED, Cic��J HEARING ON APPEAL OF HEARING EXAMINER DECISION REGARDING VARIANCE FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 267 - 4TH AVE. S. SAP-6-87/TOM PETROWITZ) Planning Division Manager Mary Lou Block reported that in 1985, the Building Division discovered an addition that was made to the residence at 267 - 4th Ave. S. The addition was built without a permit and is within 18 inches of the south side yard. The City initiated proceedings to require the property owner to either remove the addition or obtain a variance and building permit. On March 5, 1987, the Hearing Examiner held a public hearing on the variance request of Tom Petrowitz to reduce the required south side yard setback for the addition to the house located at 267 - 4th Ave. S. from 10 feet to 18 inches. On March 31, 1987, the Hearing Examiner issued his decision denying the variance request. On April 14, 1987, Mr. Petrowitz filed an appeal seeking to overturn the Hearing Examiner's deci- sion. Ms. Block said it is Staff's recommendation to uphold the Hearing Examiner's decision. Ms. Block referred to the Hearing Examiner's Decision as follows: "Based upon the preceding Findings of Fact and Conclusions, the testimony and evidence submitted at the public hearing, and upon the impressions of the Hearing Examiner at a site review, it is hereby ordered that the requested variance for a reduction of the side yard setback from 10 feet to 18 inches at 267 - 4th Avenue South, Edmonds, Washington be denied. The basis of this denial is as follows: 1) in order for a variance to be granted within the City of Edmonds, the criteria, as set forth in the ECDC 20.85.010, must be satisfied. All of the criteria must be satisfied. The present applica- tion involves a difficult situation. The applicant has enclosed a patio, which is located in the side yard setback. The enclosure was made prior to the variance request. However, the criteria for the review of the variance must still be applied. From the review, it would appear that all of the criteria, except for the showing of special circumstances necessary for the granting of a variance and the showing of a lack of a special privilege, have been met; 2) the applicant failed to provide adequate testimony or evidence to show special circumstances for the granting of a variance. From the testimony and the evidence submitted, it appears the main reason for the variance and the enclosure is to provide privacy for the residents on site. This, in and of itself, is not a special circumstance necessitating a variance. It is a special privilege being granted to the applicant; 3) even though the applicant has already constructed the enclosure, it is subject to review. It is subject to the same review as if no construction had occurred. With the lack of special circumstances and the determination that a variance would be a special privi- lege to the applicant, the variance must be denied. The applicant must remove the enclosure; 4) the drainage problem of the condominium adjacent to the property does not warrant the granting of a variance. This would appear to be a problem that must be resolved by the condominium owners. It is recommended that the applicant consult with the necessary city department to ensure that the condominium property is drained properly. If, after significant research and investigation, it is determined that tine condominium cannot be drained in any manner except onto the applicant property, then a variance may be warranted. However, an additional hearing must be held on that particular issue". Ms. Block said the subject property is located on 4th Avenue north of Walnut Street. Exhibit N3, a vicinity map, was displayed on the overhead projector. Councilmember Dwyer inquired how the issue was brought to the attention of the Building Divi- sion. Ms. Block said Staff received a complaint. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 3 MAY 19, 1987 Ms. Block referred to Exhibit #'4, a diagram depicting the house, garage, and the enclosed struc- ture. Councilmember Ostrom inquired if the existing garage was a nonconforming structure. Ms. Block replied affirmatively. Councilmember Ostrom inquired if the addition was constructed without a permit. Ms. Block replied affirmatively. Mayor Naughten opened the public portion of.the hearing. Tom Petrowitz, 267 - 4th Ave. S., inquired how his taxes were allowed to double in the last several years due to the addition if the addition was not legal. Mr. Petrowitz noted that the adjacent apartment complex has revised the carport by expanding the capacity as well as the height. Mr. Petrowitz said no one seems to be complaining about the addition to the subject property any longer. He said the addition serves the following purposes: 1) conserves energy, 2) pro- vides security to the contents of the enclosure, 3) solves the drainage problem which emanated from the adjacent apartment complex, 4) mitigated the noise from the hot tub. Councilmember Jaech inquired who owned the house. Mr. Petrowitz said his mother did. Bill Mathias, 540 Holly Dr., said he believes the Hearing Examiner and Staff made the correct decision. He noted that the applicant did not obtain necessary permits to construct the addi- tion. He urged the Council to deny the appeal. City Attorney Scott Snyder said he inspected the property with Mr. Petrowitz and ascertained from Mr. Petrowitz that there had originally been a fiberglass roof and wall with one electri- cal outlet and a concrete patio floor. Mr. Snyder said he observed that insulation, a wall, a ceiling, a light fixture, a rug, a dance floor, and a space heater had been added. Mayor Naughten closed the public portion of the hearing. COUNCIL14EMBER DWYER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER JAECH, TO ADOPT THE HEARING EXAMINER'S FIND- INGS OF FACT SUPPLEMENTED BY THE TESTIMONY PROVIDED BY MR. SNYDER AND ADOPT THE HEARING EXAMIN- ER'S CONCLUSIONS AND DECISION. MOTION CARRIED. (The complete report of the Hearing Examiner is on file at the Planning Department.) RING ON PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDATION FOR PROPOSED REZONE OF PROPERTIES LOCATED ON SOUTHEAST NFa nF R4TH AVF. W. AND 212TH ST. S.W. FROM RM-2.4 TO BN R-2-87/JIM GRAVES, ET AL. Planning Division Manager Mary Lou Block reported that on April 8, 1987, the Edmonds Planning Board held a public hearing on the request of Jim Graves to rezone the properties located on the southeast corner of 84th Ave. W. and 212th St. S.W. from RM-2.4 to BN. Ms. Block said one concern that Staff raised regarding the rezone request was the inclusion of lots R7 and °8 of Hawarden Tracts. These two lots are fully developed with a duplex, a fourplex, a residence, and an office building. If these lots were included in the BN zone, the multifamily residential uses will be made nonconforming. This could pose a problem for the fu- ture owners. Ms. Block said the Planning Board recommended approval of the entire rezone request. She noted that a copy of the Board's recommendation was attached to the Council packets. Ms. Block said it is Staff's recommendation to approve the rezone with the exception of lots #7 and #8. Ms. Block reviewed the Hearing Examiner's Findings of Fact as follows: "1) the rezone area con- tains approximately 2.05 acres of land and is located on the southeast corner of 84th Ave. W. and 212th St. S.W. in the Five Corners neighborhood. The subject properties are presently developed with two single family homes, two office buildings, two duplexes, and St. Matthew Lutheran Church. Presently, the area is zoned RM-2.4; 2) the area is bordered by commercial development to the north, northwest, and west. To the south and east is a mixture of multifamily and single family residential uses; 3) a determination of nonsignificance has been issued by the City on the rezone request; 4) the subject property is designated by the Comprehensive Plan Map as Commercial Business and High Density Residential. The proposed zoning would not conflict with the Comprehen- sive Plan". EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 4 MAY 19, 1987 t 3 r� -97 PLEASE INDICATE BELOW IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK ON THE FOLLOWING ITEM: Item 6 HEARING ON APPEAL OF HEARING EXAMINER DECISION REGARDING VARIANCE FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 267 4TH AVE. S. (AP-6-87/TOM PETROWITZ) Name (Please print clearly) Address •.......�i......u.....�....f.fl, ��� ti_,.. �. _. ...n...�_—....�..v.a�.r......_� � � � I � _ ...._..i._..... ` i ...«:Iw..w'.'rw. 1 i EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO , Item number. Originator: Planning Division For Action: X For Information: SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS REGARDING CITY COUNCIL DECISION DENYING APPEAL OF TOM PETROWITZ FOR PROPOSED VARIANCE AT 267 4TH AVE. S. (AP-6-87) AGENDA TIME: Consent AGENDA DATE: June 9, 1987 EXHIBITS ATTACHED: 1. Findings of Fact 2. City Council Minutes 5/19/87 Clearances: Dept./Indiv./Initials ------------------ ------------------ ADMIN SVCS/FINANCE CITY ATTORNEY CITY CLERK COMMUNITY SERVICES ENGINEERING PARKS & RECCREAAT�O-N PLANNING\-�j PUBLIC WORKS FIRE PERSONNEL POLICE COMMITTEE MAYOR L A COMMENTS: EXPENDITURE AMOUNT APPROPRIATION REQUIRED: $0 BUDGETED: $0 REQUIRED: SO HISTORY AND SUMMARY STATEMENT: On May 19, 1987, the City Council held a hearing on the appeal of Tom Petrowitz to overturn the Hearing Examiner's decision denying his request for a variance to allow improvements to his nonconforming residence at 267 4th Ave. S. The Council voted to deny the appeal and directed the City Attorney to prepare the necessary findings. Attached is a copy of the findings as drafted by the City Attorney. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt the findings of fact. COUNCIL ACTION: FINDPETR/COUNCIL Ie4 l _ .... ..._. a.........._ »� _...�.,_. . THESE MINUTES SUBJECT TO IE 30, 1987 APPROVAL t EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 9, 1987 (WORK MEETING) The regular meeting of the Edmonds City Council was called to order at 7 p.m. by Mayor Larry Naughten in the Plaza Meeting Room of the Edmonds Library. All present joined in the flag sa- lute. PRESENT STAFF PRESENT Larry Naughten, Mayor Mary Lou Block, Planning Div. Mgr. Jack Wilson, Council Pres. Jim Barnes, Parks & Rec. Div. Mgr. Steve Dwyer Jack Weinz, Fire Chief Laura Hall Art Housler, Admin. Svc. Director Jo -Anne Jaech Dan Prinz, Police Chief Bill Kasper Bob Alberts, City Engineer John Nordquist Peter Hahn, Comm. Svc. Director Lloyd Ostrom Bobby Mills, Public Works Supt. Scott Tracy, Student Rep. Scott Snyder, City Attorney Jackie Parrett, City Clerk Margaret Richards, Recorder CONSENT AGENDA Items (B) and (C) were removed from the Consent Agenda. COUNCILMEMBER JAECH MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OSTROM, TO APPROVE THE BALANCE OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED. The ap- proved items on the Consent Agenda include the following: (A) ROLL CALL y� (C) AUTHORIZATION TO SELL TWO SURPLUS POLICE VEHICLES v� (D) AUTHORIZATION FOR BUILDING AND GROUNDS SECTION TO PURCHASE SURPLUS AID CAR FROM FIRE DEPARTMENT ($5,000) (E) ADOPTED ORDINANCE 2622 FIXING COUNCIL SALARIES FOR COUNCILMEMBERS ASSUMING OFFICE ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 1988 (G) ADOPTION OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW REGARDING CITY COUNCIL DECISION f DENYING APPEAL OF TOM PETROWITZ FOR PROPOSED VARIANCE AT 267 - 4TH AVE. S. (AP-6-87) P APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF JUNE 2, 1987 [ITEM (B) ON THE CONSENT AGENDA] Councilmember Ostrom made the following addition: page 2, paragraph 3, "Councilmember Ostrom felt this was a complete waste of rate payers' money". Councilmember Hall made the following correction: page 1, under "Approval of Minutes", she re- quested that the statistics that she referred to as stated by the Department of Ecology be includ- ed. They are as follows: "In 1987-88, we may get 50% funding but they're not sure after that. Therein, it may be only 30-40%, if that." Councilmember Hall read a memorandum from the City Clerk with the following corrections: the hearing caption on page 5, half way down the page, should read, "HEARING ON HEARING EXAMINER RECOMMENDATION TO AMEND THE OFFICIAL STREET MAP TO REDUCE THE PROPOSED RIGHT-OF-WAY OF BOTH PL. W., NORTH OF 212TH, FROM 35 FEET TO 25 FEET (ST-3-87/CITY OF EDMONDS; paragraph 4, page 5, which begins, "Mr. Bowman ..." should begin, "Ms. Block..." COUNCILMEMBER HALL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WILSON, TO APPROVE THE MINUTES AS AMENDED AND CORRECTED. MOTION CARRIED. PROPOSED ORDINANCE 2623 AMENDING SUBDIVISION CODE TO ALLOW REVISIONS TO APPROVED SHORT SUB- DIVISIONS ITEM F ON THE CONSENT AGENDA Councilmember Jaech inquired about the difference in processing a short plat and a standard subdi- vision. Planning Division Manager Mary Lou Block said subdivision applications are heard by the Hearing Examiner and then by the Council, but short subdivision applications are reviewed at Staff level only unless appealed. She said improvement requirements are based on the number of lots rather than on the type of subdivision. Councilmember Jaech inquired if short plat applica- tions may be submitted if the Council approves the ordinance, providing that the subdivision does t 0006.04032 WSS/naa 05/29/87 FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS APPLICATION OF: Tom Petrowitz FILE NO. AP-6-87 Following notice given in accordance with law and ordinance, the City Council of the City of Edmonds heard the appeal of Tom Petrowitz in Application No. AP-6-87 for a variance with regard to property located at 267 4th Avenue South on May 19, 1987. The appeal of Mr. Petrowitz was from a decision of the Hearing Examiner. Following review of the Hearing Examiner's decision, and the evidence presented at its hearing, the City Council adopts the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of its Hearing Examiner except as specifically amended herein. Findings of Fact 1. In addition to the Findings of Fact adopted from the decision of the Hearing Examiner, we, the City Council, find that prior to the alterations performed by the applicant, the patio area of the applicant's home consisted of a fiberglass roof and one wall with concrete floor and one electrical outlet. The patio area connected the home to the garage. The patio is located in an area south and west of the home and garage. 2. The improvements to the patio area included the installation of a door and two windows, wallboard and ceiling, insulation, light fixtures, a rug, small dance floor, and a space heater, thereby converting the area from a patio for seasonal, recreational use to a fully enclosed, heated room available for full time use as a part of the applicant's residence. Conclusions 1. The Council hereby adopts the Conclusions of its Hearing Examiner. Based upon the foregoing and the adopted Findings of Fact and Conclusions of its Hearing Examiner, the Council finds that the granting of the proposed variance would violate the criteria of ECDC Chapter 20.85, in that the Council finds that there are no special circumstances present which do not relate to factors personal to the applicant and indeed the need for the variance results from the past actions of the applicant. The Council finds that granting the variance would constitute a special privilege to the property in comparison to the limitation of other properties both in the vicinity and within the community as a whole. Therefore, the application of Tom Petrowitz for variance with regard to property located at 267 4th Avenue Petrowitz Findings of Fact/Conclusions - 1 0 • � it�N.ti+t...`.a.r.............y'-::w..1C...>�.«.....��.........,.._._.Yv._.......i:.E.�.1.aay.............Gu..xe.�..�_n...a..lw.u.u...r....,G.ce.�-.i.i+..ah..w'1'i1Wu:. ika .. :%%=�v•v°iLru+iwu��.2L.u+ih1'.u..�.rx.......A:.�l:i�+a -. a K� LAttu.uiw�l w.1 �.�v. ,{.si.� \: :.. �' :. �. �J South, is hereby denied. DONE this 11th day of June 1987 ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: a-�� i, Z�' � P'ITVjCLERK, JACQUELINE PARRETT Petrowitz Findings of Fact/Conclusions - 2 0 11 i� CITY OF EDMONDS 250 5th AVE. N. • EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 98020 • (206) 771.3202 COMMUNITY SERVICES DATE:- June 11 , 1987 TO: Tom Petrowitz 267-4th Avenue S. Edmonds, WA 98020 LARRY S. NAUGHTEN MAYOR PETER E. HAHN DIRECTOR TRANSMITTING: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF THE EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL REGARDING AP-6-87 AS YOU REQUESTED: FOR YOUR INFORMATION: AS WE DISCUSSED: FOR APPROVAL: FOR YOUR FILE: REVIEW AND COMMENT COMMENT AND RETURN: MINUTES OF MEETING: REMARKS: PLANNING DIVISION Susan Painter PUBLIC WORKS PLANNING a PARKS AND RECREATION • ENGINEERING c J �.l ' .. FILE', ✓- � � �� EXHIBIT 2 DATE '//0 CITY OF EDMONDS FEEZf0 /eD HEARING EXAMINER RECT # 4<�?D % APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE APO'S HEARING DATE: APPLICANT PCL'o eo btu---' ADDRESSORt//S &A0.DMY CITY & ZIP � moods, WA- f�RD PHONE_ 63g5- INDICATE TYPE OR DEGREE OF INTEREST IN PROPERTY A�,41gse;r LOCATION OR ADDRESS OF PROPERTY //3x —6- LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY VARIANCE REQUESTED: FOR OFFICE USE ONLY: USE ZONE: ZONING ORDINANCE REQUIREMENT:— Lt W,ke, , .(Z. 10 N (, .E r Release/Hold Harmless Agreement The undersigned applicant, his heirs and assigns, in consideration for the City processing the application agrees to release, indemnify, defend and hold the City of Edmonds harmless from any and all damages and/or claims for damages, including reasonable attorneys' fees, arising from any action or inaction is based in whole or in part upon false, misleading or incomplete information furnished by the applicant, his agents or employees. Permission to Enter Subject Property The undersigned applicant grants his, her or its permission for public officials and the staff of the City of Edmonds to enter the subject property for the purpose of inspection and posting attendanp'to',,this application. SY-riature of Applicant, Owner or Representative 0 Please answer all questions 1. What are the physical characteristics, (i.e. topography, shape of lot, etc.) which create a hardship for you in regard to development of your property? Said property has a triangular shape to.,Tether with a slope exceeding: 20% in the center portion of the lot. 2. Now does your property differ from other property in the same vicinity? Adjacent property to the north has a similar shape, however they enjoy access on both 4th and' 5th !Avenues tonether �-,ith a. rectangular shape. The slope of their property remains consistent over the whole leri; ri, r �rler l 711an 3. Will this variance be detrimental to the public or damaging to other property or improvements in the vicinity? Issuance of this variance should not impact any adjacent property owners, however building to be constructed would have a more architecturally pleasinz facade should variance be issued. 4. What hardships will result to you if the variance is not granted? Will these hardships have been caused by your own action? Both the amount of units, ease of construction, and building aesthetics effect total value on the property. New owner is basing purchase price on these tiems. Should variance be a•ra.nted, purchase price will increase by 83000.00. S. Can you make reasonable use of your property without the variance? v+hereas the property is currently Inn,-(J to R iin„j+s is the highest and best 11RP The rrnnnsed de sj cry, IVon-1SSUariCP Of setback rPdlirtinn wn11lr1 r7ra+inal]}T building; area. This would also drastically effect the value of both the land and the building;. , 4 j I l m t��rar ]: r�I`ar;c_ t::r ]: r Cif EC ]: Fal_ [1:C r;r=kJr'1•`:? r("al�.lC�l a T h re?moo Let I:] •i e a 'r Q I'- C] m C? r t: w a S C: C] 1"1 Ci e m I") e I:i t] 't: h e UD't: oat e ]. n -t: h r_:CM) rlSt:I lot r_:•t::ir_)rl (:)'f: 1='t1.i 4, f:i<.I:Lcl (::c)nst:r't.lr.:'t::ion c:hanr_.I(e?d 'th(:? 't'.colaoc_Ir'ar)1'•Iv and s h as r.] e of t: lot 1. C) t . W 1"1 f ' I'" e a .a Z c] 1-1 i, 1-1 Cj 'f C] r 't: h1 e ]. 0 t_ W c] Lot 1. Cl as 11. C] w of o it. CC)n<.e;'t:ire lot c:'t::i c)n (:)•f: ED lot I-):i't': a 't:1-)fe <_i{e? ce?r'(e? met b<ac:l<: regt_t:i r•(e?rnr_?("I•t::e; 't:c)(;I(•:?t1-1er W i. 't h = 1. C] I:) I:n as n d i. I'- I'- C•-2 9 LA 1. �A r" s h .a �) e? c] f L I") I:a 1 C]'h 1�l as k: f? i. 't ' ca i. l.] ]. � ? t: C) a c: (e? o n .t `yr t�) t.t n :L 't'. i:i a <_t feel d 't. I"1 ej n (:1 I") .i `yr 1:1 I"' (:) `yr :i f:l (' ? (:I 'k:I"t {e? s (:1l_t't: I'11N (? ie;'t: I:11 (:) I:1(e? I""1:. )r n a t:: 'to b as c: to In C. I ' ei _.t c.._ "i f ( .. (); :L. I:: (_1 l::I1.1 :: :i1I:T_-Fl:; :: No . F'ri.C]r t:C] t:l�ra C:C]rl::'I:r"L!.C:'t:i.c]r7 r.]¢ w}1=i1.(?�} 't:l�C? aL.t1:1.j�,C:'t N,t'-C]�]f?r-ty t:1.1 e? a: to all") d a IF. IF, c) p ce? I"' at v a :i n e s:i (e?to. l:) lac: I ::. c) 1­1 r_: c) n I:;'k:I lot r.:'t::i (a l"t (:)'f w I" 1. ! �I t: h 7. E3 53 c.? -tee as c: }o: w as f5 increased t: C] 1. �__I ' Irtl e I? r C] I- so C] 5 e nl C"? I'" r-e' ], y t: C] I e :i n s to �a't c? to . c? =i ' c (c?'k:1:1 <a (:: I :: (:)1 :L g J. I") as .t .t `yr (? I"1 _i (:) `y' (? cl I:) `yr •t. ("1:L ici (:) I {:) I:) ie? I""}' `yr SECC=a ClCJ( Ih'r! h¢I:I�IS]:VL. i='I_..�1I� T h e C� C] m G:) I'- e h e n s i. y r r=' ]. as n c]f -the City C]f r Ci rnC] r7 Ci s C: �I 1. 1, s f C] r m •t:1:1 ca c I•.: I"' (e? (:I t_t :L r(e? (T) (-' 1"I 't. (:i 't: i:1 (c? I"I ?:i 1.1 Iie? t:l (:: C) I'1(:; :i in -Lent h s la •f• (e? . al I") d a •t:'t: I"' a c: 'k::L `v e _C]nt:tY"Let C:ti.on 'as -to .-andasrla. Ur"asnti.nca C]'f 't:hi.s eve satoo i asnc:e wc]L.11.Ci I.)fs i.n 1"1 Q tra :L 'k: I"1'f. t:t I"1 d<d I is . SE"C, rota ZONING ORDINANCE T h r-? 1:) I'" C] I C? r" 't': `! is ". C] I") C? Ci + C"] I'" .3 I_.l I 1 ]. 't- s w h'1 e r" e as =3 't:1") e I:] I`" C] i::) C] 93 C? ti 55 i= Y" L.l C: 't: lot Ire (e? w c) lot .t (:I b (e? 6 to[ n i 't:1-i 4 should the `veo a I :L a n c: (-? b (-.� g I <: n 'k: (n (:I . r_C)1l i.sti?nt ��i.t_.1 't:1-10 cani.nca r_]r"di.nanc:eo. I ) I:. t I::: lea t:l'T D I::'1 1=i 1: I`1 I::I�!']' Ai_. I'" C] y i. I) C] Let e S5't: ]. C] I 1 C? n : j C?',/ `.:• C: C] nI" ca I] 1. `�/ ]. as I'" C� C--? I'" c4 f? t: i:) e3 C: }:: •f r' (:) (It M 1=t 1. {:) f} t:l t <:1 r1 la {:) r to {:) n s:> (a F I f :i cj I"1 a :a n (:I F, a r' I r=� I:) :a I" t. m te? rt'k: t:i d :i r to {::'t..l. >r a. ci•i as c e n't': t: c] this I:) I' C] p e r 't: y . D Let f' 'to c] 'l. I"1 i. s f s-a C: -t jet s h C] L A1. d la f' Ci e C•? fn c? Ci I") i:)'k: (:1 {c?'t: I :L fit t?? I )'I : al .t Sci I') {:) lot .t {:I k'. he tot, tcl l"' :t %:11"1 {:: {e? I:) {'? {;I I"' <a n to {e? (:I . 1:7l"l I"' .t 1"1 e IF, III C) I"' fl? � l aanfi c sal:] i. r7;l C]rt ':�1 i 1. r?.c} I`e j. c,ht"e.00f. waxy aaCi .j a?.C:c?rl't: t':C] t':I"T i. }]r G�}� ?)'-'r IF <a a a c) v4 (:i 'f c) r' a i:i 1-1 te? :i :L d of: I"' a rt) `i Ft 1. (? 4 . SI:::C: 1= IMLJ1`1 VAR ]:ANC_I As. eshown on the i_..:: rr v i. c: i. r) i. t y w c] Let 1. d h e t.1-1(e? l:) I c) p c) s e? d 6 lot rI :L 't'. In 1. C] t: as n s Let t.1 m i. tot e d w i, ot 17 S:i (_?t (=. I-t _I t:) `yr (e? t:l 1:) ;r c)'k: I'I (.4I rs thf•? imi. rl i. mLet to I-)Ce'C:I'"y 'f or- 1:1 t_t :L :L d :L rt (.j . 11 t h i. see. as I:) }a ]. ]. C: at i. c] 1* 1 „ t: hl F? I.1 IF. (_)1") a I" t .l k. t' 1 -t_he c:C]ns.t:I'"L.1Cie.i.C]n 1:]•f --- 1 52 )T-1 N.E. 1 /4, SEC. 26 T.27N., R. d E.W.M. • SuHsar 314 SUO2'/7 3/a� VICINITY MAP• N M�y� zso y2574i 6� 313 �n 723 rr 318(t; g SUB 2 324 327 STA. T61 I -410 329 2i7 32d NA Au 27Z > 27/ 4zo t �3g / c Q �s.�4 '+ h 346 39Q �+ AL NUT ST. f 6' 504 L� 005 414 412410408 Q • 4D9 l2 ¢ 1 '917 51A SI! v 50VADVI S/S I CAKE ED/AGAlla. PARK APT 53 NAM {2'1 • 0 NAM GRKK t 54� a[AwC*S Z(y 430 M G VIEW 65D AAAKCr �I MID WELL WAY j l I` o L 537 NORTH 510I ` �u 5L 2 1 Q 521 514 VlIEW LM HOME wI1.DLIFE T�''�N 616 a¢FvcE 520 517 j 527 53D 531 609 � 02 CITY sat $m 533. Eo« 616 l 539 !H4 539 ass / ~ PARK 54 5554 5,t1 430 EML 621 h � 51-3 3?8 y 547 6 L31 j 547 654 5'SS 4N 649 i1 I � BEN �`1�Q+� -•1 703 702 703 900 7oSA, 1 r 600 709 710 960 PrEP] K W 71S 7/i 7// 705 f pT. Q7zr � 7/7 NavSF ] Ln t g _127 N t FINE PINE ^ Sl P1NE 4 r •. y LOOS N N N raw to Y+ M O 100E 1001 js 21600 Q 21601 l: 1020 1010 101E I /D/Z' o"c 1020 t''� t''�I Q t 21616 p O C �/ �' Q a 1005 1 a Q 1030 N /029 1030 M ,043 102 y F E C C t) O I MAKAN ROAD ZJ631 lou l0g5 %16 Abo�ogg•. bORSY 1042 ID47 0 "' X IA 1029 ,csz r'r'" ±' 21700 g o M ;!1701 1046 1D49 "' NO" lo5o �. z1701— _ _ ro74 /osi Fr AJAP,' ME roar I: 21700 21717 D ro67 i D21TL0 l*Ss Inl034 l07/ 1070 I1 `, w� •1 . 1100 E0Wo00 —I LI 21800 Z1801 I� 1 1,Io /f15 1//a103 ? J 21801 wIA Ra r 21800 Q ' O ZItj27 ❑ tl 1130 21901 219a0 o it �" //zl I13` u20 !nc Q a23 J �❑ 219® �, 21901 d �j �; 1127 ty S sE,avuE ELP Q ' Q 1139 �O 1130 r — ` BELLA COOLA ROAD 21919 1141 c f1a9 ti G O H N 1N3 • _ — _ — 21920 21929 0 _ 1154 N 15c 1165 inn —...... _. _ S----�-- -- --- 22021 Q -r i. �. AVER I � T PAS' Y z7,007 p 10 I 0 0 + Z2000 Q v d 22021 ;. CID S PLAO 200 t - s I EXAHIBIT- 4.:. \ sty N86046 45`W !7B•03' `16 1 30' 30, 4 Q 62' 1 W PROPOSED 8 UNIT BUILDINGcc Q W S � W o s2 w �z a; i I I _ I P � 30 I � I I { 9.74 "5 SCALE: 1 "= 30' i N88'd645"W _N I y Lovell-sauerland do Associates. Ina. f ' 8 OEVELOPFENT CONSULTANTS RAIliEitS Y7106 100T�N AVE W. • ED�dONDS WA. 9ar10 • MHOW T7S17G7 - i WTE F.s. lUtE F&E NO. �. JTT -- 4-9-86 19I,P52 / =30 8(p-IJOG r; :1 i 4 I l I� iVt I F fi � r,. \ J I IIII 1ID1�I ®I � I `�®I � '� /e/' ', � ,t • r 'lll I•f •J IL'�}rt} ll'F}I'. .\, I,^,y , ,\� •, I. 17 qq i { � Irk, • ` .� 7tI1C1 J ON tA -4 cn rl.rrru jr. nn ra rt _LO -a I IT .1 • I, 1i ,,�•i • � ��� I � -=_—' III, --- = I� -- - /;1�1 W Cll i!t��1L_ I \ !��C � 1�IlI�IQ•[C111I � . [1111��1�11• I�I�� ��1� Ili a Iffl'f1711•fl '�� TIII' 'I It'- � � 11.17'll Ii - Ir tll -Iv' FLU LIl LL11S11 I +,r. (j -�. "r S I S.:,w.I.J.im:su.�ui.l�iGsfJ4�Y44i 't5*i.:tak•.9! t✓..x �ataliLtii._4x (�,y.=:� Highland Park Apartments 1151. - 5th ave. S. Edmonds, 98020 Building owners: Independent Order of. Foresters Attn. Robert F. Moyer 1.00 Border Ave. Suite D Salona Beach CA. 92075 Unit Numerical Listing: Building; A 101-108,201-214,301-314,401-414 Building B 11,20-49 0 Forester House i resident { Resident 789 Don Mills Road 1123 5th Ave. S. #7 .151 5th Ave. S. -Don Mills, Ontario Edmonds, WA 98020 Bldg. A #105 Canada M3C 1T9 Edmonds, WA 98020 Independent Order of Resident Resident Foresters 1123 5th Ave. S. #8 1151 5th Ave. S. Attn: Robert F. Moyer Edmonds, WA 98020 Bldg. A #106 100 Border Ave. Suite D Edmonds, WA 98020 Salona Beach, CA 92075 Hajo Corporation Resident Resident 22415 Woodway Park Road 1123 5th Ave. S. #9 1151 5th Ave. S. Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Bldg. A #107 Edmonds, WA 98020 Monte Clouston Resident Resident 24127 100th Ave. W. 1123 5th Ave. S. #10 1151 5th Ave. S. Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Bldg. A #108 Edmonds, WA 98020 John & Joann Mansfield Resident Resident 8238 N.E. 115th P1. 1123 5th Ave. S. #11 1151 5th Ave. S. Kirkland, WA 98034 Edmonds, WA 98020 Bldg. A #201 Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident Resident Resident 1123 5th Ave. S. #1 1151 5th Ave. S. 1151 5th Ave. S. Edmonds, WA 98020 Bldg. A #101 Bldg. A #202 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident Resident Resident 1123 5th Ave. S. #2 1151 5th Ave. S. 1151 5th Ave. S. Edmonds, WA 98020 Bldg. A #102 Bldg. A #203 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident Resident Resident 1123 5th Ave. S. #3 1151 5th Ave. S. 1151 5th Ave. S. Edmonds, WA 98020 Bldg. A 141103 Bldg. A #204 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident Resident 1123 5th Ave. S. #4 1151 5th Ave. S. Resident Edmonds, WA 98020 Bldg. A #103 Bldg 5th Ave. S. Edmonds, WA 98020 Bldg. A #205 Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident Resident Resident 1123 5th Ave. S. #5 1151 5th Ave. S. 1151 5th Ave. S. Edmonds, WA 98020 Bldg. A #104 Bldg. A #206 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident 1123 5th Ave. S. #6 Edmonds, WA 98020 V A -a 0 Resident Resident 1151 5th Ave. S. Resident 1151 5th Ave. S. 1151 5th Ave. S. Bldg. A #304 Bldg. A #314 Bldg. A #208 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds', WA 98020 Resident Resident Resident 1151 5th Ave. S. 1151 5th Ave. S. 1151 5th Ave. S. Bldg. A #305 Bldg. A #401 Bldg. A #209 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident Resident Resident 1151 5th Ave. S. 1151 5th Ave. S. 1151 5th Ave. S. Bldg. A #306 Bldg. A #402 Bldg. A #210 Edmonds, WA .98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident - Resident Resident 1151 5th Ave. S. 1151 5th Ave. S. 1151 5th Ave. S. Bldg. A #307 Bldg. A #403 Bldg. A #211 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident Resident Resident 1151 5th Ave. S. 1151 5th Ave. S. 1151 5th Ave. S. Bldg. A #308 Bldg. A #404 Bldg. A #212 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident Resident Resident 1151 5th Ave. S. 1151 5th Ave. S. 1151 5th Ave. S. Bldg. A #309 Bldg. A #405 Bldg. A #213 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident Resident 1151 5th Ave. S. Resident 1151 5th Ave. S. 1151 5th Ave. S. Bldg. A #310 Bldg. A #406 Bldg. A #214 Edmonds, WA 93020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident Resident 1151 5th Ave. S. Resident 1151 5th Ave. S. 1151 5th Ave. S. Bldg. A #301 Bldg. A #311 Edmonds, WA 98020 Bldg. A #407 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident Resident 1151 5th Ave. S. Resident 1151 5th Ave. S. 1151 5th Ave. S. Bldg. A 4,312 Bldg. A #408 Bldg. A #302 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident + Zesident ( 2sident 1151 5th Ave. S. 1151 5th Ave. S. Bi5d1 5th Ave.A3S. Bldg. A #409 Bldg. B #23 g Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Y, Resident Resident Resident 1151 5th Ave. S. 1151 5th Ave. S. 1151 5th Ave.'S. Bldg. A #410 Bldg. 4 Bldg.B #34 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident Resident Resident 1151 5th Ave. S. 1151 5th Ave. S. 1151 5th Ave. S. Bldg. A #411 Bldg. B #25 Bldg. B #35 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 1. Resident Resident Resident 1151 5th Ave. S. 1151 5th Ave. S. 1151 5th Ave. S. Bldg. B #36 Bldg. A #412 Edmonds, WA 98020 Bldg. B #26 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident Resident Resident 1151 5th Ave. S. 1151 5th Ave. S. 1151 5th Ave. S. Bldg. B #37 Bldg. A #413 Bldg. B #27 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident Resident Resident 1151 5th Ave. S. 1151 5th Ave. S. 1151 5th Ave. S. Bldg. B #38 Bldg. A 1#414 Edmonds, WA 98020 Bldg. B #28 Edmonds, WA 98020' Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident Resident Resident 1151 5th Ave. S. 1151 5th Ave. S. 1151 5th Ave. S. Bldg. B #39 Bldg. B #11 Edmonds, WA 98020 Bldg. B #29 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident Resident Resident 1151 5th Ave. S. 1151 5th Ave. S. 1151 5th Ave. S. Bldg. B #40 Bldg. B #20 Bldg. B #30 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident Resident Resident 1151 5th Ave. S. 1151 5th Ave. S. 1151 5th Ave. S. Bldg. 6 #41 Bldg. B #21 Bldg. B #31 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 �. Resident Resident Resident;' 1151 5th Ave. S. 1151 5th Ave. S. 1151 5th Ave. S. Bldg. 6 #42 Bldg. B #22 Bldg. B #32 Edmonds, WA 98020 ;` Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident r Don Polinsky/Resident Rainier Mort. Co. 1151 5th Ave. S. 1130 5th Ave. S. #101 Harle Lord #0127264196 y Bldg. B #43 Edmonds, WA 98020 P.O. Box C-34040 Edmonds, WA 98020 Seattle, WA 98124 Resident Rainier Mort. Co. Ralph Hadland/Resident 1151 5th Ave. S. Florence Campbell #0127264193 1130 5th Ave. S. #201 Bldg. B. #44 P.O. Box C-34040 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Seattle, WA 981'24 Resident Florence Campbell/Resident Rainier Mort. Co. 1151 5th Ave. S. 1130 5th Ave. S. #102 Ralph Hadland #0127264195 Bldg. B #45 Edmonds, WA 98020 P.O. Box C-34040 - Edmonds, WA 98020 Seattle, WA 98124 Resident i Rainier Mortgage Co. 1151 5th Ave. S. J.R. Oberdorfer #467-7-052317 George Trickell/Resident Bldg. B #46 P.O. Box C-34040 1130 5th Ave. S. 1#202 Edmonds, WA 98020 Seattle, WA 98124 Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident 1151 5th Ave. S. J.R. Oberdorfer/Resident Rainier Mort. Co. Bldg. B #47 #4 1130 5th Ave. S. #103 George Trickell #467-7-0523 Edmonds, 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 P.O. Box C-34040 Seattle, WA 98124 Resident 1151 5th Ave. S. M. Schulstad/Resident Donald & Joan Benn Bldg. B #48 1130 5th Ave. S. #104 359 Hunington Street Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Eugene, OR 97405 Resident Rainier Mort. Co. Resident 1151 5th Ave. S. M. Schulstad #0127264201 1130 5th Ave. S. #203 Bldg. B #49 P.O. Box C-34040 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Seattle, WA 98124 Rainier Olga Baddeley Mort. Co. #467-7-052281 Rainier Mort. Co. Donald R. Pierce #0127264200 Rainier Mort. Co. Neton Hyde #0127263064 P.O. Box C-34040 P;O. Box C-34040 P.O. Box C-34040 Seattle, WA ,98124 Seattle, WA 98124 Seattle, WA 98124 Olga Baddeley/Resident 1130 5th Ave. S. #101 Donald Pierce/Resident Neton Hyde/Resident Edmonds,*WA 98020 1130 5th Ave. S. #105 1130 5th Ave. S. #204 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Rainier Don M. Polinsky Mortgage Co. #0127264220 Harley Lord/Resident Rainier Mort. Co. P.O. Box C-34040 1130 5th Ave. S. #200 Edmonds, WA 98020 Betsy Ziegler #0127264207 Seattle, WA 98124 P.O. Box C-34040 Seattle, WA 98124 Rainier Mort. Co. James Coleman #467-7-052291 P.O. Box C-34040 Seattle, WA 98124 James Coleman/Resident 1130 5th Ave. S. #300 Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident 1130 5th Ave. S. #301 Edmonds, WA 98020 Rainier Mort. Co. Umatac Dev. Corp. I #467-7-052300 P.O. Box C-34040 Seattle, WA 98020 i H.S. Vandeveren/Resident 1130'5th Ave..S. #302 Edmonds, WA 98020 3 f Rainier Mort. co. t H.S. Vandeveren #0127264205 P.O. Box C-34040 Seattle, WA 98124 E.L. Snelson/Resident 1130 5th Ave. S. #303 4 Edmonds, WA 98020 Rainier Mort. Co. E.L. Snelson/Resident #012-7-264202 P.O. Box C-24040 Seattle, WA 98124 Rainier Mort. Co.' Keith Jacobson #467-7-05230 P.O. Box C-34040 Seattle, WA 98124 Robert Vrooman/Resident 1130 5th Ave. S. #305 Edmonds, WA 98020 Rainier Mort. Co. Robert Vrooman #0127264206 P.O. Box C-34040 Seattle, WA 98124 r. no rl sl �tR. -e r J <r I CITY OF EDMONDS NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING THE HEAR i NG FRAM i NFR _WILL HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING THURSDAY, MAY 15 _19 86 -,ON THE FOLLOWING APPLICATION: FILE* NO. V-1 1-86 - ' VARIANCE Tn R n LCF THE RED IITRF STREET SETBACK ERnM sRin - FROM 15' TO 5" TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A MULTIPLE FAMILY BUILDING. PROPERTY ADDRESS AND LOCATION APPROXIMATELY 1140 5TH AVENUE SOUTH (VACANT LOT SOUTH OF 1130 5TH AVENUE SOUTH) ZONE DISTRICT RM-1, 5 THE HEARING WILL BEGIN AT % : 30 P M., IN THE PLAZA MEETING ROOM, LIBRARY BUILDING, 650 MAIN STREET, EDMONDS, WASHINGTON. IF YOU WISH TO COMMENT ON THIS PROPOSAL, YOU MAY COME TO THE HEARING AND SPEAK. YOU MAY ALSO WRITE A LETTER STATING YOUR VIEWS WHICH WILL BE CONSIDERED AT THE HEARING. PLEASE ADDRESS THE LETTER TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND INCLUDE THE ABOVE FILE NUMBER. IF THE ITEM IS CONTINUED TO ANOTHER HEARING BECAUSE THE AGENDA IS NOT COMPLETED, OR FURTHER INFORMATION IS NEEDED, THE DATE OF THE CONTINUED HEARING WILL BE ANNOUNCED ONLY AT THE MEETING. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION MAY BE OBTAINED AT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, 250 FIFTH AVENUE NORTH, EDMONDS (PHONE 771-3202, EXTENSION 252). THE REMOVAL, MUTILATION, DESTRUCTION, OR ' CONCEALMENT OF THIS NOTICE BEFORE THE DATE WARNING! OF THE HEARING IS A MISDEMEANOR PUNISHABLE BY FINE AND IMPRISONMENT. THIS NOTICE MAY BE REMOVED AFTER MAY 15, 1986 r5aol 4 mid 5- 5 _84:� FILE NO. V-11-86 APPLICANT Monte Clouston/ liajo Corp. AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ss. COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH ) Susan Painter being first duly sworn, on oath deposes and says: That on the 5th day of May ,19 86 the attached Notice of Public Hearing was mailed as required to adjacent property owners, the names of which were provided by the applicant. S i g n e d Subscribed and sworn to before me this d.6-"� day of , 19 S �G Notary Public in and for the State of Washington. Residing at MY COMMISSION COMMISSION EXPIRES 6.16.89. ��� ..�,�� 1 ✓,• L - w.i.u....t.4�4.a.a.Sv7.J...�3.1t'.n..�u.cu.ss.... I ...tti. wu.iJr.+n:L'..t ....aC_ �.JS.h.�..i o �. .G , .....� 4C.«. i....�.utu.,..�>.. xa.....v. ... ui.:.LC FILE NO. V-11-86 APPLICANTMonte Clouston/ Hajo Corp. AFFIDAVIT OF POSTER STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ss. COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH ) Duane Bowman being first duly sworn, on oath, deposes and says: That on the 5th day of May , 19 86, the attached Notice of Public Hearing was posted as prescribed by Ordinance, and in any event, in the Frances Anderson Center and Civic Center, and where applicable on or near the subject property. Signed ' Subscribed and sworn to before me this �`� day of 19� Notary Public in and for the State of Washington. Residing at,�.r���/ MY, COMMISSION EXPIRES 6.16.89. q Y'"49 �,P ;'r r, v n ) I'�. +`fit:�,Ik. d'A1. '. +.:c;, ., u i° ti I }Y .. F yy r :r,� I ti k J i`t c- ti ...a,. 7 t, IN i ER -OFFICE CORRESPONDCNCE Dan Smith/Jerry. Hauth - Engineering Gary McComas -Fire Marshal ✓ April 16 1986 To Beb�y-�'4i-14s—P-ubl4-c—Wo-r-(. Date' p ,. Subject V-11-86 VARIANCE TO REDUCE STREET SETBACK FROM REQUIRED 15' TO 5' (ALONG SR 104) AT APPROXIMATELY 1134 5TH AVENUE S. (RM 1.5) HEARING DATE: MAY 15, 1986 PLEASE RESPOND WITH YOUR COMMENTS NO LATER THAN MAY 1, 1986. THANKS. t I TOPS © FORM 12.32 LITHO IN U. S. ♦. c.; t Duane -Bowman - Planning.... By VERBAL ORDERS DON'T GO PUQLIC vows t -j r�,, :. .. ..'.' � .� .. L s rsu . � :, .w<a „r�--mr+,'•P{fiY ....�+.,.,. �'L r. �' _T?:�' „„�t '�—_ � _ - ,7 �.,�' , e?y,1,a...w.k:�S�,.oAu.+....'aL+nZ...•.:..1.{:::,s:...�Zwxs`.....�....�.,..,.�vin.L...s......K.. ...,, ,. ,.,.._....... _........ ... ..... a+11 �-��. (... .- �'t�g YR 1 Y�� ,': 7 .x �'n � xCf +l ��'Y1y �"y;th'�.i t.. "f {. 1 ,�tSEM.r INTER CORRESPONDENCE pN . -OFFICE Dan Smith/Jerry_Hauth'- Engineering Y� Gary McComas --Fire Marshal ✓ April 16 1986 To",: Date' Qpj�y�11� l l c- D�f fnl r 3 ` 'Subject ` V-11-86 :VARIANCE TO REDUCE STREET SETBACK FROM REQUIRED 15' TO 5' (ALONG SR 104) AT APPROXIMATELY 1134 5TH AVENUE S. (RM 1.5) HEARING DATE: MAY 155 1986 PLEASE RESPOND WITH YOUR COMMENTS NO LATER THAW MAY 1, 1986. THANKS. REGF-IVED RECEIVED APR 16 1986 PuaLlc \�,oIts EDMONIDS FIRE DEPT., Duane Bowman - Planning - By VERBAL ORDERS DON'T GO TOPS © FORM 1232 LITHO tN u. 5. �. Q�? V'1 ��7'Q'L •L1 AIL V i x� �rr ti « '•"'�4?''✓,,;;:f....w..�',i�+.,'4ir�w'f - 1INTER-OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE ' Dan. Smi th/Jerry. Hauth - Engineering Gary McComas Fire Marshal Date April 16, 1986 To=�ek�b��l�-N-s--P-ub-l-i-c—Wor;�r - �Y �..,_ ... Subject a.. V-11-86 VARIANCE TO REDUCE STREET SETBACK FROM REQUIRED 15' TO 5' (ALONG SR 104) AT APPROXIMATELY 1134 5TH AVENUE S. (RM 1.5) HEARING DATE: MAY 15, 1986 PLEASE RESPOND WITH YOUR COMMENTS NO LATER THAN MAY 1, 1986. _ THANKS. RECEIVED APR 16 1886 ENGINEERING Duane Bowman - Planning By VERBAL ORDERS DON'T GO TOPS © FORM 1232 LITHO IN u. S. /jZ I 7 S! ��.� rL �; dt _.%�' 'J- _ ;� c'� ,' rti�: cd /lit s�rE- ��� 11 �i / C x e �V 7 �� l.�i ✓ /rrnf f �-'�' !% J"/i ,C'.e! �� ��o2DJ�`'S�"/' /���"'gip`—/�t,� ��: Lxj�/t�c•�J; THIS PACKET SENT TO HEARING m EXAMINER ON MAY 8, 1986 EXHIBIT LIST V-11-86 EXHIBIT 1 - STAFF REPORT EXHIBIT 2 - APPLICATION/DECLARATIONS EXHIBIT 3 - VICINITY MAP EXHIBIT 4 - PLOT PLAN EXHIBIT 5 - RENDERING OF PROPOSED BUILDING EXHIBIT 1 STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER FILE: V-11-86 HEARING DATE: May 15, 1986 I. REQUESTED ACTION: Variance to reduce the required 15' street setback from SR 104 to 5' to allow the construction of a multiple family dwelling at approximately 1140 5th Ave. S . , Edmonds. II. APPLICANT/OWNER: Hajo Corporation c/o Monte Clouston 22415 Woodway Park Road Edmonds, WA 98020 III. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: That portion of Tract 9, Block 1, South Park Addition to Edmonds according to the plat thereof recorded in Volume 8 of Plats, on page 13, Records of Snohomish County, Washington, lying easterly of SR 104. IV. STAFF FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: A. Description of the Subject Property and Surrounding Area The subject property is located along the west side of 5th Ave. S. and SR 104. It is a triangular shaped lot containing approximately 12,436 sq. ft. of land area. The site is presently undeveloped. The lot has a level area located along 5th Ave. S. but then slopes steeply to the west. Surrounding development is multiple family residential. B. Official Street Map Proposed R/W Existing R/W East - 5th Ave. S. 60' 60' South - SR 104 200' 200' C. Conformance to Chapter 20.85.010 a i Page 2 Staff Report V-11-86 I 7 i. 1. Special Circumstances Special circumstances do appear to exist in this i articular case. The subject property is triangular p streets. shaped at the intersection of two 0 arteria 1 st That coupled with the topography of the lot make the site very difficult to develop. i.`. r 2. Special Privilege , The proposed variance, given the circumstances the f lot, does not appear to represent a grant of special �. privilege. p 3. Comprehensive hensive Plan The Comprehensive policy Plan map designates the IE; subject property, as well as the surrounding area, High Density Residential. The proposed variance, as conditioned, does not appear �. to conflict with the purposes of the Comprehensive Plan. �l 4. Zoning Ordinance I" The subject property, as well as the surrounding area, is zoned RM-1.5. To the west is RS-6 zoning. The proposed variance, as conditioned,,does not appear to conflict with the purposes of the zoning ordinance or the RM-1.5 zone district. �> 5. Not Detrimental The proposed variance does not appear to pose any significant impact to the public nor to any nearby private property or improvement. 6. Minimum Variance The requested variance does appear to represent a minimum variance request given the circumstances of the lot. The improved portion of SR 104 will be approximately 80' to 90' away from the proposed structure. V. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: 0 Staff Report V-11-86 Page 3 It is the recommendation of the staff that V-11-86 be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall comply with all Architectural Design Board requirements. 2. Any excavation and grading exceeding over 500 cubic yards will require a conditional use permit. 0 'PLEASE PRINT YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS BELOW IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM AND/OR WISH TO RECEIVE A COPY OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S FINDINGS OF FACT V-11-86 HAJO CORPORATION Variance to reduce the required 15' street setback from SR104 to 5' for proposed multiple family building at approximately 1140 5th Ave. S. PLEASE PRINT NAME ADDRESS NO 51 WA Tug.& 5 .Lla.La:.:...i .......a..�.0 r.J....i .ivu ...... ��t. ..v,........ ,..x. ..,.....r..a...uk ....... .t...w u,ut.r... .,c., ..au...u.u�.L L, ut.w.0 In.+..u.r,.....-. s,,,.,.v.., .._,�.......�Y:..a.ww.�..._s..u..uw....,.W..u......way..�,_..c......e�w,.iv_........ ... .. ..__ RECEIVED JUN 061986 CITY OF EDMONDS LARR9"A994PM0NQ,S 250 5lh AVE. N. • EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 96020 • (206) 771.3202 MAYOR HEARING EXAMINER FINDINGS AND DECISION OF THE HEARING EXAMINER OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION FILE: V-11-86 OF HAJO CORPORATION FOR APPROVAL OF A VARIANCE DECISION: The variance is granted subject to the conditions listed. INTRODUCTION The Hajo Corporation, c/o Monte Clouston, 22415 Woodway Park Road, Edmonds, Washington, 98020, and hereinafter referred to as Appli- cant, has requested approval of a variance for the reduction of the street setback for property located at approximately 1140 - 5th Avenue South, Edmonds, Washington. The subject property is more particularly described as set forth in the plot plan submitted with the application for this request. The specific variance request is for a reduction of the required 15' street setback from SR 104 to a setback of 5 feet to allow the construction of a multiple family dwelling on the subject property. A hearing on the request was held before the Hearing Examiner of the City of Edmonds on May 15, 1-086. At the hearing the following presented testimony and evidence: Duane Bowman Planning Dept. City of Edmonds Edmonds, WA 98020 Elsie Hyatt (no address given) Monte Clouston 22415 Woodway Park Rd. Edmonds, WA 98020 At the hearing the following exhibits were submitted and admitted as part of the official record: Exhibit 1 - Staff Report 2 - Application/Declarations " 3 - Vicinity Map 4 - Plot Plan " 5 - Rendering of proposed building " 6 - Topography Map 7 - Site plan 0 I, Findings and Decis�.,n of the Hearing Examiner of the City of Edmonds Re: V-11-86 Page 2 After due consideration of the evidence presented by the Applicant; evidence elicited during the public hearing; and, as a result of the personal inspection of the subject property and surrounding areas by the Hearing Examiner, the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions constitute the basis of the decision of the Hearing Examiner. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Applicant has requested a variance for a reduction of the street setback from State Route 104 at or near 1140 5th Avenue South, Edmonds, Washington. The specific request is for a reduction of the 15-foot street setback to one of 5 feet. (Staff report and Bowman testimony.) 2. The Applicant submitted as Exhibit 3 to the hearing a vicinity map. A copy of this vicinity map is attached hereto and by this reference is hereby incorporated as part of these findings. (Exhibit 3.) 3. As shown on the vicinity map the subject property is a trian- gular shaped lot containing approximately 12,436 square feet and is adjacent to State Route 104. The lot is undeveloped and has a level access area on 5th Avenue South. The lot slopes steeply to the west. (Staff report and Bowman testimony.) 4. The subject property is zoned RM-1.5. Section 16.30.030 of the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) requires a.minimum street setback of 15 feet for RM-1.5 zoned property. The Appli- cant seeks a variance from this section of the ECDC. (Staff report and Bowman testimony and ECDC.) 5. It is the intent of the Applicant to develop the subject pro- perty with a multiple family development consisting of six apartment units. In order to -adequately locate the building the Applicant seeks a variance. (Staff report and Clouston testimony.) 6. In order for a variance to be granted within the City of Edmonds the criteria as set forth in Section 20.85.010 of the ECDC must be satisfied. These criteria include: A. Because of special circumstances relating to the property, the strict enforcement of the zoning ordinance would deprive the owner of use rights and privileges permitted to other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning. B. The approval of the variance would not be a grant of special privilege to the property in comparison with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning. C. The approval of the variance will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Edmonds. D. The approval of the variance will be consistent with the purposes of the zoning ordinance and the zone district in which the property is located. E. The variance as approved or conditionally approved will not be significantly detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and same zone. F. The requested -variance is the minimum necessary to allow the owner the rights enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning. (ECDC.) 7. The property slopes severely to the west. Development of the property is limited because of the sloping. In addition, the triangular shape of the property makes the location of the building envelope limited necessitating the need for a variance. (Staff report and Bowman testimony.) 8. The property is located at the intersection of two major arterial streets in the City of Edmonds. Further, it is adjacent to State Route 104. The location of the lot will mean an increase in traffic and, together with the shape of the lot, cause difficulty in adequately developing the build- ing. (Bowman testimony and Clouston testimony.) 9. The grant of a variance will not be the grant of a special privilege to the Applicant. (Staff report and Bowman testimony.) 10. The Comprehensive Policy Plan Map of the City of Edmonds desig- nates the subject property as High Density Residential. (Staff report.) 11. The requested variance will not pose any significant impact to the public, nor to nearby private properties or improvements. No testimony in opposition to the requested variance was voiced at the public hearing. (Staff report.) 12. If the variance is granted and the street setbacks are reduced the structure developed on the subject property will be approxi- mately 80 feet to 90 feet away from State Route 104. This will provide adequate setback standards from this major highway in the City of Edmonds. (Staff report and Bowman testimony.) 13. The Planning Department of the City of Edmonds recommended that the requested variance be granted subject to the following conditions: A. The Applicant shall comply with all Architectural Design Board requirements. j Findings and Decision of the Hearing Examiner of the City of Edmonds Re: V-11-86 Page 4 B. Any excavation and grading exceeding over 500 cubic yards will require a conditional use permit. (Staff report.) CONCLUSIONS 1. The application is for the approval of a variance for the reduction of a street setback from 15 feet to 5 feet on pro- perty located at approximately 1140 - 5th Avenue South, Edmonds, Washington. 2. In order for a variance to be granted in the City of Edmonds the criteria as set forth in Section 20.85.010 of the ECDC must be satisfied. The application has satisfied these criteria. 3. Special circumstances exist for the granting of a variance. Because of the topography of the site, the shape of the lot, and its location to major arterials the property is limited in its development. In order to be adequately and properly developed setback adjustments are necessary. 4. The grant of a variance will not be the grant of a special privilege to the Applicant. 5. The variance is consistent with the purposes of the zoning ordinances of the City of Edmonds and the RM-1.5 zone district. 6. The requested variance does not conflict with the Comprehen- sive Plan of'the City of Edmonds. 7. The variance does not pose an impact to the public nor to nearby private properties or improvements. 8. The requested variance is the minimum necessary for the pro- perty to be adequately developed. 9. The Planning Department of the City of Edmonds has recommended approval of the variance subject to the conditions listed in Finding #13. 10. There was no opposition to this variance request. DECISION Based upon the preceding Findings of Fact and Conclusions; the testimony and evidence submitted at the public hearing; and, upon the impressions of the Hearing Examiner at a site view, it is hereby ordered that the requested variance be granted. The specific request is for a reduction of the required street setback from 15 feet to 5 feet on property located at approximately 1140 - 5th Avenue South, Edmonds, Washington, and is granted subject to the n Findings and Decision of the Hearing Examiner of the City of Edmonds Re: V-11-86 Page 5.. following conditions: 1. The Applicant shall comply with all Architectural Design Board requirements. 2. All excavation and grading exceeding over 500 cubic yards of material will require a conditional use permit. 3. The Applicant is to secure all the necessary permits from the City of Edmonds prior to any construction. 4. Development of the site must be consistent with the develop- ment as shown on Exhibit 4 to this hearing,which is attached hereto and hereby incorporated as part of these conditions. Any deviation from this will require a review by the Planning Department to determine if additional variances or other permits are required. Entered this 3rd day of June, 1986, pursuant to the authority granted the Hearing Examiner under Chapter 20.100 of the Community Development Code of the City of Edmonds. S M. DRISCOLL ing Examiner NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL Written appeals alleging specific error of fact or other grounds for appeal may be filed with the Planning Department, City of Edmonds, Civic Center, Edmonds, Washington, 98020, within fourteen days of the date of the Hearing Examiner's final action. In this matter any appeal must be received by the Department prior to 5:00 p.m. on June 17, 1986. 0 AAO CITY OF EDMONDS HEARING EXAMINER APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE APPLICANT Dorchester Condominium Assoc. DATES FEE RE C T APO' S HEARING DATE: :, � ADDRESS 1041 5th Avenue South CITY & ZIP Edmonds, WA 98020 PHONE775-6234 (R. Hibbert, Pres.) INDICATE TYPE OR DEGREE OF INTEREST IN PROPERTY Represents Condominium owners LOCATION OR ADDRESS OF PROPERTY 1041 5th Avenue South, Edmonds LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY The Dorchester, a condominium, recorded under Volume 46 Pages 86 through 90, records of Snohomish County, Washington. VARIANCE REQUE =D: Reduction in off-street parking from twenty-four (24) to nineteen (19) spaces. FOR OFFICE USE O`iL`' : USE ZONE : R/n 1..5 ZONING ORDINANCE REO IREME IT : Dr1 Y2.S Release/Hold Harmless Agreement The undersigned applicant, his heirs and assigns, in consideration for the City process_n, :he application agrees to release, indemnify, defend and hold the C yv «o=ids Ina mless _roue any and all damages and/or claims for damages, nciuu;.7.� _e�sonaDle attorneys' fees, arising from any action or inaction is cased i n whole or in part upon false, misleading or incomplete information by the applicant, his agents or employees. per�ission to Enter Subject Property The undesisnzd applicant grants his, her or its permission for public officials and r_:c staff of the City of Edmonds to enter the subject property for the purpose o= inspection and posting attendant to this application. Representative Kelly M. Yates, Agent JEREMIAH LONG & ASSOCIATES, 10700 Meridian Avenue North Suite 507 Seattle, WA 98133 (206). 367-2929 INC., P.S. 1 0 Please answer all questions 1. What are the physical characteristics, (i.e. topography, shape of lot, etc.) which create a hardship for you in regard to development of your property? Because of the limited lot size, no additional off-street pa king to compensate for the loss of parking can be provided._ 2. Now does your property differ from other property in the same vicinity? It does not differ. 3. Will this variance be detrimental to the public or damaoina tc other property or improvements in the vicinity? No The elimination of the off-street parking will not have a detrimental impact on parking in the area. The loss of off-street parking is compen- sated for by an increase in on -street parking (in the curb cuts). The e imination ot the off-street parking also reduces a traffic hazard associated with the setback areas. The elimination of the off-street parking is consistent with the beautification objectives of the Edmonds Community Development Code which prohibits arkin in the street setback area. e an scaping of the off-street parking should enhance the (over) 4. What hardships will result to you i= t:^e variance is not granted? Will these hardships have been caused by you_ action? The landscaping of the off-street parking will have to be removed, thereby reducing the beauty and value of the Dorchester structure. The elimination of the off-street parking was the responsibility of a deve, B.E. Beddall, Inc. The Dorchester condominium owners were never informed that the elimination of the parking might violate Edmonds law. Bed all eliminated the parking without first obtaining the necessary. land use 5. Can you make reasonable use of your property without the var-ance. permits. Yes. However, the restoration of the off-street parking will --create an unsightly asphalt area on 5th Avenue South, reduce all property values, and create traffic hazards on both Forsythe Lane and Fift�nue South. SHEET 2 OF 5 SHEETS D OR CH ESTER EXHIBIT A A CONDOMINIUM Plot Plan IN SW 1 /4 NW 1 /4 SECTION 25, T.27N., R.3E., W.M. CITY OF EDMONDS. SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON NO'39'00r`M 2441'-----------"� -------------------�-- I NOTE: ALL PARKING AREAS P-1 THROUGH P-11 AK UNITED COMMON AREA I I I I I . I I "At - - - - - - 1I1 039'"M 156.00' a SCALE 12d 1. A-tt ttt! 1N w !! s I I r r r I I ..note I LEOEND I C.A. COMMON AREA I 1 I � } s, u 1 I I L.C.A. LIMITED COMMON AREA I I Ci r f I I f SET IRON RESM W/CAP Na M i r r r ar j I 1t SET BOAT VK W/MA*Mt N0. 4561 I ar r t 14 b• SET Ma 45{i I I o — rimlwy 0 I o>T—ctettx e-k ♦ KW AW* aw I I o.00 CONC. MALL O I l+. 3 STORY 9LM MO INCLUDING BASEMENT 1041 Sth AVENUE S. ' I I f I 1 --A S1R1P OF LAND Y M tWTN I LY04 3 1/Y ON EAC1N SIDE OF FACIJJTE.1F1E ELECTRICAL Iy 1 CA. : our 1s V td 1 I � R-•- t+r tt,icte.trr 000 rat ' 1 � 3 t CASE YON, NW OR. SM 4 Nw C 1/ I , 1 � NQ39'00'W - -��-��-�---�- �_ --_----� Nw 1/4 SEC. B ..1,_-- —1— -----------4-"-- AVENUE S. 1 a�atio' v a BENCH MAW. 'P' IN PACIFIC STATES HYDRANT �/` «• C O} S V e>L a s C.. L 1 G AVENUE S. ABOUT SS' 3 N. Cr �, C.S•j �� LOCATED ON E. SIDE OF Sth SOUTH PROPERTY LINE c- ELEVATION 152.20 FT. ` DATUM: CITY OF EDMONDS NA.LW' I. I RMA 02-05-047 ,,.'4-_ 4 1..' _.'iv... o.'��. .1 ,.�.`.._......ai.,...ty� .,.. F..rJ.: e�n,,...a, zrt_. t.. ..,. _ma.,4...t t.r..,•+ti,tsLu tt «�,:�.�u m +a.. w�. v..,..+.+�::n ..,....._u „.,r_ , t .,,.._. .._—._...c... �i ,�. 6 1 /5 r 2 i> iti4 2-153 — = �I- - EXHIBIT B ( / 7 14 r. �r4.3 S v O 2•152 2.195 -- 13 4 �4 j v ry Vicinity Sketch c) ` HEMLOCK� J '• 12 io 14-' �.►; I _-1 14 �oz Q y-� -- I I z •� 1 ! C\�>J I I,-IGy 1\` —� O u17 ! i I � — —i_r U i Q e -- J I �,,y cr2 - li► U _ _ 4 C 1 c c I c 14- I 1- c 14 Sho�azazc� g\ N ( 21(0a 1 z-1 -- ---- -� - - -I 1 2 ,w I n ^to �0 2.151 8407300oi- 1 Q. '740'11 e-7eA P N . PINE ST 3 w I 26 �I D G SP ( -18,;; 65) 0) P�� p'��l I v .o 7- , N III! 2-�Iy c� 9 130 FORSYTH LANE 1 ^ I L.4'/ / cn - -� - 1 -t - - i 0� Cj 1 C i l/ w rip c L I ��`(��C 1 13 8 i- - - - -` - - - - _ 02 `S 117NE 1 4 z Q 6 r s 4 /V0 3 (6873) ! 2 -1 4 1 1 (69 8)6 o condo ► - - -7 q10� oZ4 71 r, li,E OL IMP/ ♦ I 1 ' I C 1 B= U 1 (o condo 4 - - --- - SHAMROCK FIR PL. /o 1 PLAZA (6800) 5 6 7 H .,N. c � 7 (CONDO) /L A N (5 6O ° 1--'�------ 144 -9 1n l V r CL ---- SE-AVUE 1 a 1 z-117 7 1 n N 9 02 1 1 (c condo) _ B_ 19 0-1 14 I i . \' 07 ti O, 6fo VT t l 1 1 I , \ \\ i� 1 'O 1 C, C) 1 j l /O /�� i /D (4722) - --- -J I HIGHLAND N I _moo L I 1 is F- P 1 r y W Cr ,,,, • w�+4y-u..S;+....4..�.Lf.a.b..... ,F��.�uta .i.a. �. .....s .�......,... ... ......... ....:.J ..u..�.. .�..r .» ._.M...,.�w......w14 .,:r1+.1. .r_... �.,.�. ..... _...t... a«.. ......y,.1.._a ..+.abe.......,� ....v..�..c�_rw.,..ay �.y�..a.M.�.,�..'�. .�. �`+. MEMORANDUM June 4, 1987 TO:. James M. Driscoll Hearing Examiner FROM: Duane V. Bowman Assistant City Planner SUBJECT: Staff Recommendation Dorchester Condominium Variance #V-18-87 The original staff recommendation on this matter was to approve the proposed variance subject to a number of conditions. Those conditions were: 1. The two curb cuts along 5th Ave. S. and the one curb cut along Forsyth Lane must be closed per Chapter 18.80.060 (C)(3) of the ECDC. 2. In conjunction with the closure of the abandoned curb cuts, new concrete sidewalk panels to match the existing sidewalk must be installed. The Applicant and the neighboring property owners have reached an agreement supporting the variance. Attached is a copy of a letter to the City from the Executive Condominium Association supporting the variance request, provided that three additional parking stalls be installed. I have done a site inspection of the subject property and cannot see how three additional parking spaces, that will meet code dimensional requirements, can be placed on site. Staff supports the variance request, subject to the following conditions: 1. Two additional parking stalls be placed in the rear parking lot. These stalls shall comply with all code required dimensions. 2. The two curb cuts along 5th Ave. S. and the one curb cut along Forsyth Lane must be closed per Chapter 18.80.060 (C)(3) of the ECDC. 3. In conjunction with the closure of the abandoned curb cuts, new concrete sidewalk panels to match the existing sidewalk must be installed. n 5x ,. 0( RECEIVED BOARD OF DIRECTORS SUN 1 i987 EXECUTIVE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION 4ecutiveOffices 1001-1005 5th Ave. South Edmonds, Wa. 98020 May 30, 1987 Larry S. Naughten Mayor, City of Edmonds 505 Bell Street Edmonds, Washington 98020 Dear Mayor Naughten: On behalf of the Board of Directors of the Executive Homeowners Association, Bernard Anderson and I wish to express our sincere appreciation for the opportunity to meet with you and discuss the Public Hearing scheduled for June 4, 1987 by the Hearing Examiner on a request for a "Variance to Reduce Required Number of Parking Spaces from 24 Spaces to 19 Spaces", at 1041 5th Avenue South in Edmonds (Dorchester Condominium). We were generally unaware of the legal actions taking place and the court's involvement in this case until you graciously explained the situation to us. During our discussion you may recall our firm resolve to generally oppose any unwarranted variances in the neighborhood that would increase street parking unnecessarily, whereby traffic or safety would be negatively impacted. You may also recall our deep concern for the new unit owners at the Dorchester condominium, who were listed as co-defendants, together with the previous building owner, B. E. Bedall, and would have to bear the costs to return the parking facility at the Dorchester to its orig- inal configuration. Based upon our discussion of the events with you on May 26th, our Board of Directors met with four representatives of the Dorchester condominium, and suggested an alternative to the Variance they requested that would permit their landscaping improvements to re- main intact and would increase on -site parking by three additional parking spaces. After a very positive exchange of thoughts between our respective board officers and members, and a subsequent fe2vthar review of the proposal by the Dorchester Board and its members, the proposal was approved and the attached letter was hand carried to me on Friday afternoon, May 29, 1987. I am pleased to advise, Mayor Naughten, that we of the Executive Condominium strongly support this concept which would provide three additional on -site parking spaces, because it appears to be in the best overall interests of the City, the Dorchester unit owners and in the relationships of the future among ourselves and our neighbors. It also preserves an attractive landscape project that can be viewed and admired by all Edmonds residents. See page 2 t 1 J1 Letter to Mayor Naughten from the Executive Condominium - page 2 :'1 The City has expressed a desire on several ocicasions to eliminate the curb cut-outs and to recurb those areas on 5th Avenue South and on Forsyth Lane for safety reasons. This proposal will permit this to be accomplished. The Dorchester owners will be able to min- mize their potential costs for conversion, and have indicated that under current ownerships they will not need to park on the streets, for the most part. The three on -site parking spaces will result from the elimination of the recently installed tree -box area near the driveway entrance and the reconfiguration of one portion of the parking facility where some surplus area'lis available for use by, an additional vehicle. I would ask that an additional action be taken by the City - and that is to reduce the potential for accident�on Forsyth Lane by painting the curbs "yellow" for a -space of five feet on both sides of the driveway exits of the Executive and Dorchester condominiums. Cars frequently park right up to the driveway exits on Forsyth Lane and block the view of exiting vehicles. A number of close calls have resulted from this condition. It is particularly hazardous during winter weather. I again wish to thank you for your assistance in this matter, and we are all hopeful that this alternate proposal to the Variance request will be accepted. Respectfully, R44L,.01 I(ext ROLAND J . COTT Secretary/Board Member Executive Condominium Homeowners Assn. Attachments Letter from Dorchester Condominlum to Roland Scott CC Bill Davenport, Dorchester Condominium Richard Hibbert, Bernard Anderson, Executive Condominium,; y �J Mr. Roland Scott Secretary No 104 The F,xecutive condominium 1001 5th Ave, South Edmonds, Wa 9o02O RE: Additional Parking Space 'Within Property Limits, The Dorchester Condominium, 1041 5th Ave, South Edman ds , ra 9bU20. Dear Roland, Regarding our joint board meeting held at your condominium May 27, lya'/ of which we all agreed that if we provided three (3) off-street parking spaces at the Dorchester, the Executive board would not protest against us ------ in fact, be supportive of our efforts to provide adequate parking, for our members and to perserve our lawn areas ( 5th Street and Forsythe). The Dorchester Board has approved the three ( 3 ) parkin{ space proposal and. the balance of the association members have also appra ed this proposal, On behalf of our board, andthe entire membership of the Dorchester Associate, I want to thank ,you and the board for the sincere interest ,you have expressed in getting this long, drawn out and expensive matter settled. Needless to say Roland, it is too bad we did not get together sooner. Again, we would welcome any support you can give us either written or verbal. You nei hb r, � ^ f William R. Davenport Board Member cc; Farris Nuetzman, Sect. i (` R E C L I V E D EME 1T50acradert, A(00 21 MAY 2 8 1041 - 5Eli c�vE. cSo. Edmonds, 'cWasfZln9Lon 98020 PLANNING DEPT. % .'�_�' 57 �r .., � �%,��,-�j � ....nil..,%-•v..�� � •.�,%� � ��.�J��''Q._.<�.:?� r Oaf q —77 do a�i",� �,��,I ��� �.: ./%� ,• �:� � �_�`_,=�.t.�- c���..,�: ;� 'ram �� "�` i, 4 LA�? C.: L. Cat C`��--t—,�-1�� %✓�.�' Allrl .'�;"1s..,•taw�aai.!«sxz�o.a5viuu,_�.,L.«..,� .... _.....___. .,, ._.. _ ._.._.__, ._.....x+x:w.n.� .�.._..._.�..,..._.....u�i.s...._....w.,r_;�awU.rL..a........................_..h::..o.iw�...�.,s.,_._„r.a..w.,..�....,.....�........,:.. ,.....,.i._, .,J.....u.... i,--- REUr- IVED 1 MAY 181987 Cityof Edmonds � ENGINEERING Gary McComas - Fire M. INTER -OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE � Bobby Mills - P.W. Dan Smith/Jerry Hauth - Eng ✓ Duane Bowman 5/18/87 TO FROM DATE SUBJECT V-18-87 VARI'ANCE TO REMOVE FINE PARKING PLACES FOR DORCHESTER CONDOMINIUM AT 1041-5TH AVE. S. (RM 1.5) HEARING DATE: JUNE 4, 1987 PLEASE RESPOND WITH YOUR COMMENTS NO LATER THAN MAY 273 1987. THANKS. -,� -^�:.� �,..a.��..:.i��'w.:".�.».ta►.�..�.a'L',..ra,�k:.+�k;i.-!is. 3t�v_c..,..ssi:.�f:�,�.,.ii...�..e.tr„�':Y.wS.c._1.: N:i�. Cy � { r� m m..r..,.....:wob.'wuar:'.�.�t�a.:.+e:tzss.a�.'..a+.:iai.'r`.m, � e � _ - .�.t ..... _,�k..', w:,s.r */ rK _r a 11 k MAY 181987 Cityof Edmond$PUBLIC WORKS �4 Gary McComas - Fire INTER -OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE Bobby Mills - P.W.5/18/87 Dan Smith/Jerry Hauth - Eng. Duane Bowman TO FROM DATE SUBJECT REr':.:."VMD V-18-87 VARIANCE TO REMOVE FIVE PARKING PLACES FOR DORCHESTER CONDOMINIUM AT 1041-5.TH AVE: S. (RM 1.5MAY '0lid T HEARING DATE: JUNE 4, 1987 PLANhiAQ DEPT. PLEASE RESPOND WITH YOUR COMMENTS NO LATER THAN MAY' 27, 1987. THANKS. r P p' c/ I ii •r c/ o 40 C? cL �i jl � .�}4f ((�:i � 3 i .Y 't Y 4.]....i .( •I) t 1 } l #� hi i 1't .: •. .�,Cj'' ,ur. Y.>.u`»•+.+,..•..�:,.d$ btu.��:r'.�,:......�...n.::.��lY:,�.w,;,e:Ld:�,..cr..5i:.ers:v.7e:wAJt�u.'sr,�e..'a�sYSk'•,m.icswirf�..::SLiz:.�wr..k,.�:::Jidi. n.4:t .ua,:.riTe�. '"�.YCY>aotnww'�,�d.sa:xace�Y.'w,.ra+nq::.Tw [i RECEIVED City of Edmonds MAY 191987 Gary McComas.- Fire M.TER-OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE Bobby Mills - '�/ INP.W. 5/18/87 Dan Smith/Jerry Hauth - Eng. Duane Bowman TO FROM DATE ,,1 to ICr`T V-18-87 VARIANCE TO REMOVE FIVE PARKING PLACES FOR DORCHESTER CONDOMINIUM AT 1041-5.TH AVE: S. (RM 1.5) HEARING DATE; JUNE 4, 1987 PLEASE RESPOND WITH YOUR COMMENTS NO LATER THAN MAY' 27', 1987. THANKS. Te ov-k • PROPOSED AEMAI ; TO HEARING EXAMINE: ON J( 3p 4, 1987 CONCERNING A VARIANCE ,BEQUEST TO .:EDUCE MtKING SPACES AT THE DORCHESTER CONDOMINIUM FROM 24 TO 19 SPACES ------------------------------------- S MY NAME IS ROLAND SCOTT AND I L�ESIDE AT 1001 5th AVENUE SOUTH IN THE EXECUTIVE CONDOMINIUM - JUST ACROSS THE STREET TO THE NORTH OF THE DORCHESTER CONDOMINIUM. I HAVE i.ESIDED THE.{E FOR MORE THAN SIX YEARS. THANK YOU FOR PERMITTING ME THE OPPOI:TUNITY TO ADDRESS THIS ASSEMBLAGE. LAST YEAR IN THIS SAME FORUM THE EXECUTIVE CONDOMINIUM OWNERS STRONGLY OPPOSED A SIMILAR VARIANCE iiEQUEST INITIATED BY M:. B. E. BEDALL, THE FORMER OWNER OF THE PiiOPEI�TY UNDER DISCUSSION. ltll . BEDALL' S VARIANCE REQUEST WAS NOT MADE UNTIL SOME TIME AFTER HE HAD ALREADY COMPLETED THE nESTRUCTUidNG OF HIS PitOPE,\TY , AND IN SO DOING ELIM- INATE.D SEVERAL ON -SITE PARKING SPACES. OUR MEMBERSHIP WAS GREATLY CONIC E10ED AT THE MANNEti IN WHICH THE VARIANCE APPEARED TO BE FORCED UPON THE CITY AND THE PUBLIC, AND IN THE FACT THAT A MOVE TO INCREASE STREET PARKING AT THE EXPENSE OF ON -SITE PARKING WAS NOT IN OUil OVERALL BEST INTERESTS. WE DID, HOWEVER, EMPATHIZE WITH THE PLIGHT OF, THE NEW OWNERS, AND HAD AN APPRECIATION FOR THE AESTHIC IMP:OVEMENT RESULTING FROM THIS NEW LANDSCAPING PROVIDED. WE WERE NOT CONVINCED THEN, NOR ARE; WE NOW, THAT NINETEEN PARKING SPACES FOR NINETEEN UNITS IS A SATISFACTOc�Y FIGURE- EVEN THOUGH THERE MAY BE CURRENTLY ONLY THAT APPROXIMATE NUMBER OF VEHICLES PARKED THERE AT ANY ONE TIME. THAT 1 TO 1 MIX IS NORMALLY NOT .ACCEPTABLE% PNT OUR CURRENT MOBILE SOCIETY AND COULD CHANGE RATHER QUICKLY. HAVING RECENTLY LEARNED THAT THE UNIT OWNE,:S OF THE DORCHESTER HAVE BEEN NAMED AS CO-DEFENDANTS ALONG WITH MR. BEDA LL , TO ABSONB THE COSTS OF RETURNING THE PROPERTY TO ITS ORIGINAL STATE AND FOR CERT- AIN LEGAL COSTS, AND HAVING LEARNED OF MR. BEDALL' S FILING FOR BANK RUPCY WHEREIN HE IS APPARENTLY NO LONGER IN THE PICTURE, `.I'HE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE .EXECUTIVE CONDOMINIUM MET WITH THE REP- RESENTATIVES OF THE DORCHESTER TO DISCUSS AN ALTERNATE PROPOSAL FOR SEE PAGE TWO REMARKS TO HEADING EXAMINER - PAGE 2 c RESOLUTION OF AN UNFORTUNATE SITUATIIDN . THE PROPOSAL WAS TO MODITY THE VARIANCE REQUEST FOR'�,A REDUCTION OF FIVE SPACES (FROM 24 TO 19) TO A DEDUCTION OF TWO SPACES (FROM 24 TO 22) , WITH THE THREE ADDITIONAL PARKING SPACES TO BE PROVIDED ON -SITE. THE EXACT LOCATION OF THOSE SPACES WAS TO BE DETERMINED BY THE DORCHESTER OWNERS, WITH PErIHAPS SOME OUTSIDE ASSISTANCE. TWO OF THE THREE SPACES COULD BE MADE AVAILABLE BY REMOVING THE TREE -BOX CONSTRUCTION ALONG THE EAST WALL OF THE PARKING AREA NEAP. THE ENTRANCE OF THE DRIVEWAY, AND ANOTHER SPACE BY MINOR RECON- FIGURATION OF AN AREA WHERE SOME SURPLUS SPACE IS CURRENTLY AVAIL- ABLE. THE DORCHESTER REPRESENTATIVES INDICATED TENTATIVE ACCEPTANCE OF THE PROPOSAL PENDING APPROVAL BY ITS MEMBERSHIP. THE MEMBERSHIP ALSO ACCEPTED THE PROPOSAL, AND A LETTER TO THAT EFFECT HAS BEEN MAILED TO THE MAYOR, WITH A COVERING LETTER FROM THE EXECUTIVE CONDOMINIUM BOARD OF DIr.ECTORS SUPPORTING THE CHANGE. ON BEHALF OF THE EXECUTIVE OWNERS, I UKGE ACCEPTANCE OF THIS ALTER- NATE VARIANCE - WHICH WILL RESULT IN THE FOLLOWINGS 1. PRESERVATION OF AN ATTRACTIVE LANDSCAPE PROJECT, TO BE EN- JOYED BY ALL CITIZENS OF EDMONDS . 2. MITIGATION OF COSTS THAT COULD BE INCURRED BY THE DORCHESTER UNIT OWNERS. 3. PERMIT THE CITY TO :gECU:etB THE CUT-OUT AREAS ON FIFTH AVE. SO. AND ON FORSYTH LANE, WHICH HAVE BEEN INDICATED BY THE CITY TO BE TRAFFIC AND SAFETY HAZARDS. 4. REDUCE OR ELIMINATE `9 1E NEED FOR OFF -SITE PARKING FOR THE MOST PART. 5. IMPROVEMEN2 OF RELATIONSHIPS AMONG CONDO AND APARTMENT OWNERS/ RESIDENTS IN THE VICINITY. WE FEEL THAT THE ACCEPTANCE OF THIS PROPOSAL WOULD RESULT IN BENEFITS TO ALL CONCERNED PARTIES. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND ATTENTION. ��.... _c4 .b. ?.4.:see&_..yea,..,w;:'.'.�.....%_,.......:a.....—.....d:.:.�..�...>...+..:...,,.,..a�..W........__�_�: ., .., _..a .k......�....�+.,_:in....1_......:s.�: ,: :.�t..e....:a.,�«'�3Y"'ii y:.; .. I - ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS LIST Please see register attached hereto as Exhibit C. Property owners and/or residents whose names have been highlighted in yellow on the register require notice. On my oath, I certify that the names and addresses provided represent all properties located within 80 feet of the subject property. Kell M. Yates Signature of Applicant br li 'nt's Represe.nta-ive LA Subscribed and sworn to before me this /ay of May 19 87 Notary Publiq in alndfor the State of Washington Residing at My appointment expires 0 t f rf isF i `i �N •. r t $TRt 2 41. d Itf .. iSi Cl 4�Y^Y'4q�,}�jy��• ( �1y7 C 1� /�} �:' S Cqt 4i .(`yl yf 7J�ldi z 41 2T IePrf,f tts.*}ai'3.i'r �1 Ytp;}is `rT, ,fb i t ��! r•"� ������� rt t�C' � Y +�qU �F� Cr I r s +i $ S1rg1 iC" d cuff o f. i�3ttti�p x is tt �s ' ' p jR �4 r'�sK'R u �n����,�,•t� t48� fT S.x Yi>��-,'Z7 r 1 x r f ��, # Resident 1024-5th Ave. S. 0104 Edmonds, WA 98020 Jeremiah Long & Assoc. Resident 1024-5th Ave. S. #A201 Attn: Kelly M. Yates N. Edmonds, WA 98020 10700 Meridian Ave. Suite 507 Seattle, WA 98133 Cascade Savings & Loan Resident Powell #181-15645 1024-5th Ave. S. #A202 2828 Colby Edmonds, WA 98020 Everett, WA 98201 Mr. Powell/Resident Resident 1032 5th Ave. S. 1024-5th Ave. S. #A203 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Karl K. Larsen Resident 17726-15th Ave. N.E. 1024-5th Ave. S. #A204 Seattle, WA 98177 Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident Resident 1052 5th Ave. S. 1024-5th Ave. S. #A301 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident Resident 1024 5th Ave. S. 0101 .1024-5th Ave. S. #A302 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident Resident 1024-5th Ave. S. #Al02 1024-5th Ave. S. #A303 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident Resident 1024-5th Ave. S. #A103 1024-5th Ave. S. #A304 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident 1024-5th Ave. S. #B101 Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident 1024-5th Ave. S. #B102 Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident 1024-5th Ave. S. MOT Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident 1024-5th Ave. S. #B202 Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident 1024-5th Ave. S. #B203 Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident 1024-5th Ave. S. #B204 Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident 1024-5th Ave. S. #B301 Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident 1024-5th Ave. S. #B302 Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident 1024-5th Ave. S. #B303 Edmonds, WA 98020 '1-�. �r''..A! nos f r - . .:.y_: ,._.._.. __....._.....�..,.,..,...._..........>y..._ ._.. ,.. .... ,_...,._.. _. ._.. �...��...... ._ _"_.____l k Resident Resideth S. #B304 Resident 1050 5th Ave. S. #202 Resident 3 1050 5th Ave. S. #401 Ave. Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident #C101 Resident 1050 5th Ave. S. #203 Resident 1050 5th Ave. S. #402 1024-5th Ave. S. Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident Resident Resident 1050 5th Ave. S. #204 Resident 1050 5th Ave. S. #403 Ave.Av S. #C201. Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 9S.# Edmonds, 8020 Resident Resident Resident 1024-5th Ave. S. #C301 1050 5th Ave. S. #205 1050 5th Ave. S. #404 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident Resident Resident 1024-5th Ave. S. #D101 1050 5th Ave. S. #301 1050 5th Ave. S. #405 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident Resident Resident 1024-5th Ave. S. #D201 1050 5th Ave. S. #302 1050 5th Ave. S. #406 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 3 If Resident Resident Resident 1024-5th Ave. S. #E101 1050 5th Ave. S. #303 1050 5th Ave. S. #407 j Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 I' Resident i Resident 1050 5th Ave. S. #304 1050 5th Ave. S. #101 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 7. Resident1050 Resident 5th Ave. S. #305 1050 5th Ave. S. #102 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident 1050 5th Ave. S. #201 Edmonds, WA 98020 Patrick Bennett Resident Resident Pat Pat N.W. nth 510 Forsyth Lane #202 510 Forsyth Lane #211 Seattle, WA th Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident Resident Resident Resident S. #A 510 Forsyth Lane #203 510 Forsyth Lane #301 Edmonds, Ave.Av 9Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident Resident Resident 1067-5th Ave. S. #B 510 Forsyth Lane #204 510 Forsyth Lane #302 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident Resident Resident Resident S. #C 510 Forsyth Lane #206 510 Forsyth Lane #303 Edmonds, Ave.Av 9Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident Resident Resident 510 Forsyth Lane #205 510 Forsyth Lane #304 1067-5th Ave. S. #D Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident Resident Resident 510 Forsyth Lane #207 510 Forsyth Lane #305 1067-5th Ave. S. #E Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Altom-Dickerman Prop. Resident Resident C/o P.O. Box 728 510 Forsyth Lane #208 510 Forsyth Lane 1#306 Lynnwood, WA 98046 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident Resident Resident 510 Forsyth Lane #101 510 Forsyth Lane #209 510 Forsyth Lane #307 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident Resident Resident 510 Forsyth Lane #103 510 Forsyth Lane #210 510 Forsyth Lane #308 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident 510 Forsyth Lane #201 Edmonds, WA 98020 ,..: _... _.. .... f. M l. i Resident Resident �i .',.��' 510 Forsyth Lane #309 510 Forsyth Lane #407 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident Resident 510 Forsyth Lane #310 510 Forsyth Lane #408 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident Resident 510 Forsyth Lane 1#311 510 Forsyth Lane #409 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident Resident 510 Forsyth Lane 1#401 510 Forsyth Lane #410 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident Resident 510 Forsyth Lane 0402 510 Forsyth Lane #411 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident 510 Forsyth Lane #403 Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident I� 510 Forsyth Lane #404 Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident 510 Forsyth Lane #405 Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident 510 Forsyth Lane #406 f Edmonds, WA 98020 2, \.. f � ••::J 1 . . ,1+„ .2.u1.�... .......x..i..a..:..........,,.v.. �....`.,.:.:_:......�:...t.. + .._. a. .. t.. - .. ..:..._....c.. :,.r.... ..c..La.».u. t...».« ...i»_ .. ._. _. 4v qi Robert & Vivian Schroth/Res, Frank M. Taylor/Res. #206 Pearl E. Bowe/Res. ' 1071-4th Ave. S. #304 ` 1071-4th Ave. S. #101 1071-4th Ave, S. Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 P. Reeves-White/Res. Russell & Dorothy Bowen/Res. Joan P. Brooks 1070-5th Ave. S. #102 1070-5th Ave. S. #207 P.O. Box 343 Juneau, AK 99802 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 First Mutual Savings Bank Jack E. Wallace/Res. Resident/Owner S. #305 Reeves -White, P. 1070-5th Ave. S. #208 1070-5th Ave. Edmonds, WA 98020 #0110068045 Edmonds, WA 98020 P.O. Box 1647 Bellevue, WA 98009 David M. Munger/Res. Robert A. Brine Terrence T. Kincaid/Res. 1070-5th Ave. S. #103 1001 2nd Ave. W. #401 1070-5th Ave. S. #306 Edmonds, WA 98020 Seattle, WA 98119 Edmonds, WA 98020 Pioneer Bank Resident/Owner Evelyn F. Nelson/Res. Munger, David M. #143388 1070-5th Ave. S. #301 Edmonds, WA 98020 1070-5th Ave. S. #307 Edmonds, WA 98020 4111-200th S.W. Lynnwood, WA 98036 Aldo & Francis Sparzani/ People's. Mortgage Co. Brine, Robert ,A. F.M. Taylor Resident #61570/61571 P.O. Box 1582 Lynnwood, WA 98036 1071-4th Ave. S. #201 2411-4th Ave./Box 1788 Edmonds, WA 98020 -Seattle, WA 9.8111 Janet F. Roats/Resident Zola E. Allred/Res. Resident/Owner 1070-5th Ave. S. #308 1071-4th Ave. S. #202 1071 4th Ave. S. #302 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Gabriel Jansen/Res. Patricia R. Otteson/Res. Bernice Wallace. 1070-5th Ave. S. #309 1070 5th Ave. S. #204 558 Seamont Lane Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds,'WA 98020 Resident/Owner Pioneer Bank Lyla Dean/Resident Jansen, Gabriel 1071-4th Ave. S. #204 1070-5th Ave. S. #303 #02-00000157 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 4111Q200th S.W. Lynnwood, WA 98036 John D. Carter/Resident James W. Gallagher/Res. 1070-5th Ave. S. #402 1070-5th Ave. S. #205 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 3 Pioneer Bank Marjorie R. Shoemaker/Res. Bernice R. Doyle/Res. Taylor, Frank M. 520 Pine Street #101 520 Pine St: #202 #24-00000090 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 4111-200th S.W. Lynnwood, WA 9.80.36 Resident/Owner Lee '&'Jeanette Miller, Sr. A.L. Brock/Res. 1070-5th Ave. S. #401 520 Pine St. #102 520 Pine St. #203 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Jean E. Barnard/Res. R.M. Palmer/Res. Guy & Leona 520 Pine St. Allgeyer/Res. #204 1070-5th Ave. S. #403 520 Pine St. #103 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident/Owner 1070-5th Ave. S. #404 Edmonds, WA 98020 William E. Nims/Res. 1070-5th Ave. S. #405 Edmonds, WA 98020 Pioneer Bank Nims, William E. #02-00000297 4111-200th S.W. Lynnwood, WA -98036 Jeanette A. Lindjord/Res. 1070-5th Ave. S. #406 Edmonds, WA 98020 Rainier Fin. Ser. Co. Elmer Bates/Res.' Palmer, R.M. WA 98020 #400-7-180747 520 Pine #205 P.O. Box C-34040 Edmonds, WA Seattle, WA 98124 Sea Crest Assoc. Monica I. Taylor P.O. Box 1043 4280 N.W. 3rd Court Lynnwood, WA 98046 Plantation, FL 33317 Resident/Owner Resident/Owner 520 Pine St. #104 525 Forsyth Lane #106 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Mary P. Hopp/Res. Sophia V. Miller/Res. 520 Pine St. #105 525 Forsyth Lane #107 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Shoreline Savings Forrest D. Hibbard/Res. J. Au re/Res. Hopp, Mary P. 525 Forsyth Lane #108 1070-5th Ave. S. #407 #0151001815 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 P.O. Box 25788 Seattle, WA 9.8125 Zelta E. Wehde/Res. Shoreline Savings GMAC Mortgage Corp. 520 Pine St. #20T Hibbard, Forrest D. Aure, J. #012932527990 Edmonds, WA 98020 #1051001464 7320 Old York Road P.O. Box 25788 Philadelphia, PA 19126 Seattle, WA 98125 0 Washington Federal S&L Lindsay, Keith H. #50-200-51872 425 Pike St. Seattle, WA 98101 Glenn & Shirley Nelson/Res. 525 Forsyth Lane #110 Edmonds, WA 98020 Harvey R. & Virginia L. Hillin/Res. 525 Forsyth -Lane #206 Edmonds, WA 98020 Carl F. & Ruth E. Lanser/ Resident 525 Forsyth Lane #207 Edmonds, WA 98020 Monica Taylor/Resident 525 Forsyth Lane #208 Edmonds, WA 98020 Pioneer Bank Taylor, Monica I. #4400001622 4111-200th S.W. Lynnwood, WA 9.8036 Richard & Karla Brown/Res. 525 Forsyth Lane #209 Edmonds, WA 98020 Elizabeth Fowler/Res. 525 Forsyth Lane #210 Edmonds, WA 98020 OZO86 VM `spuowP3 £O£# "S '@AV u45-500L sad/s�m@j euol ' UPAI Roland & Merle Scott/Res. 1001-5th Ave. S. #104 Edmonds, WA 98020 Milton & Pauline Diafos/Res. 1001-5th Ave. S. #105 Edmonds, WA 98020 John & Lois Gamlam/Res. 1001-5th Ave. S. #106 Edmonds, WA 98020 Leonard & Alice Reynolds/Res. 1001-5th Ave. S. #306 Edmonds, WA 98020 M.B. Anderson/Resident 1005-5th Ave. S. #102 Edmonds, WA 98020 Lurline B. Brown/Resident 1005-5th Ave. S. #103 Edmonds, WA 98020 Doreen Weymouth Wahl/Resident Margaret & Bernard Anderson/ 10125=236th Place S.W. Resident Edmonds, WA 98020 1005-5th Ave. S. #101' Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident/Owner 1001-5th Ave. S. #204 Edmonds, WA 98020 Robert & Gladyce Baxter/ Resident 1001-5th Ave. S. #205 Edmonds, WA 98020 Fredlyn J. Wehman/Resident 1001-5th Ave. S. #206 Edmonds, WA 98020 Earl & Margaret Tuter/Res. 1001-5th Ave. S. #304 Edmonds, WA 98020 Thomas & Kelly Bradde r 1001-5th Ave. S. #305 Edmonds, WA 98020 OZO86 VM `spuowP3 ZO£# "S 'anV u45-500L 4uaPLsab/,aaLL�W sLaaoW Helen L. Piazza/Resident 1005-5th Ave. S. #201 Edmonds, WA 98020 George Shauver/Resident 1005-5th Ave. S. #202 Edmonds, WA 98020 First Interstate Bank Mtg. Shauver, George #315519 P.O. Box 21506 Seattle, WA 98111 Aslaug Hauge McKean/Resident 1005-5th Ave. S. #203 Edmonds, WA 98020 Jack D. Stevens/Resident 1005-5th Ave. S. #301 Edmonds, WA 98020 Z9£66 VM ` e L LeM e L LPM LLSL Xo8 '0"d Z5Z5Zt# '0 �oeC `suana4S • 64W au04S PLO 0 Douglas N. Gillies/Res. < 1041-5th Ave. S. #27 Edmonds, WA 98020 Peoples Mortgage Co. Cumbo/Trevis #7005770 2411-4th Ave./Box 1788 Seattle, WA 98111 Cumbo/Trevis or Resident 1041-5th Ave. S. #1 Edmonds, WA 98020 Harley & Kathryn O'Neil 21801 Nootka Road Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident/Owner 1041-5th Ave. S. #2 Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident/Owner 1041-5th Ave. S. Edmonds, WA 98020 Anne R. Sargent/Resident 1041-5th Ave. S. #12 Edmonds, WA 98020 Mabel 0. Heath Paul & Leslie Heath 20115 84th Ave. W. Edmonds, WA .98020 Resident/Owner 1041-5th Ave. S. #13 Edmonds, WA 98020 James & Ruby O'Sullivan/ Resident 1041-5th Ave. S. #14 Edmonds, WA 9.8020 Shoreline Savings #3 Marcello #0151003977 P.O. Box 25788 Seattle, WA 98125 Peoples Mortgage Co. Cohn, Carol M. #7005796 2411 4th Ave./Box 1788 Seattle, WA 98111 Carol Cohn/Resident 1041-5th Ave. S. #4 Edmonds, WA 98020 Karl & Elizabeth Erickson/ Resident 1041-5th Ave. S. #5 Edmonds, VIA 98020 Farris L. Nuetzmann/Res. 1041-5th Ave. S. #11 Edmonds, WA 98020 OZO86 VM `spuowp3 9Z# 'S 'any 445-LVOL aaumo/4uapLsab Marcello/Resident 1041-5th Ave. S. #15 Edmonds, WA 98020 Wash. Mutual Savings Bank Richards, E.J. #01-836-097802-3 P.O. Box 834 Seattle, WA 9.8111 E.J. Richards/Resident 1041-5th Ave. S. #16 Edmonds, WA 98020 Marion & Phyllis Piete/Res. 1041-5th Ave. S. #17 Edmonds, WA 98020 OZO86 VM `spuowP3 RQM Laanel ZZ8 ueeH aLLe4eN ' PLAeG Wash. Mutual Say. Bank Davenport #01-836-097553-2 P.O. Box 834 Seattle, WA 98111 Davenport/Resident 1041-5th Ave. S. #21 Edmonds, WA 98020 Peoples Mortgage Co. Marcello, S. #7005804 2411-4th Ave./Box 1788 Seattle, WA 98111 S. Marcello/Resident 1041-5th Ave. S. #22 Edmonds, WA 98020 Nicholls/Resident 1041-5th Ave. S. #23 Edmonds, WA 98020 Wash. Mutual Savings Bank Nicholls #01-836-097760-3 P.O. Box 834 Seattle, WA 98111 Gibraltar Savings of WA Bord, Donald K. #95-10000226 P.O. Box 1319 B.el 1 evue , WA 98004 Donald Borg/Resident 1041-5th Ave. S. #24 Edmonds, WA 98020 Richard Hibbert/Res. 1041-5th Ave. S. #25 Edmonds, WA 98020 b'008'6 tfM ` anAa L La8 6L£ L xo8 '0�d ZLOOOOOL-56# H paegOLB `4aaggLH VM So SBULAeS ae4LejgLq 0 ^`..`, t � 'y ......e.,.._w.,.,._......_.,.W�.._..,..,..�:...w.. ...,..._. ,.yi..,..:a.a., I.,..r.,. ... .. ...,. .. ...v �_ .._ ...,..,� � .. ..... ... .. ._.,... _.. ._ ..,v.. ....,a...s.. ,_..... _ _ ref +� STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss. COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH ) Duane Bowman and says: FILE NO. V-18-87 APPLICANT Dorchester Condo. AFFIDAVIT OF POSTER being first duly sworn, on oath, deposes That on the 22nd day of May , 1987 , the attached Notice of Public Hearing was posted as prescribed by Ordinance, and in any event, in the Frances Anderson Center and Civic Center, and where applicable on or near the subject property. Signe Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of 19,. Notary Public in and for the State of Washington. Residing at _ a. 1; MYOJAIIIA!SSION EXPIRES C.rc I i1V01011 EXPIRES O FILE NO. V-18-87 APPLICANT Dorchester Condo. AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ss. COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH ) S.us-an Painter being first duly sworn, on oath deposes and says: That on the 22nd day of May ,19 87 the attached Notice of Public Hearing was mailed as required to adjacent property owners, the names of which were provided by the applicant. S i n e d Subscribed and sworn to before me thisday of Notary Public in and for the State of Washington. Residing at _ my, COMMISSION EXPIRES 6,16.89. CITY OF EDMONDS NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING j PROPERTY ADDRESS AND LOCATION - O =oft - ZONE DISTRICT, • WILL HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING :OLLOWING APPLICATION: THE HEARING WILL BEGIN AT •30,0M., IN THE PLAZA MEETING ROOM, LIBRARY BUILDING, 650 MAIN STREET, EDMONDS, WASHINGTON. IF YOU WISH TO COMMENT ON THIS PROPOSAL, YOU MAY COME TO THE HEARING AND SPEAK. YOU MAY ALSO WRITE A LETTER STATING YOUR VIEWS WHICH WILL BE CONSIDERED AT THE HEARING. PLEASE ADDRESS THE LETTER TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND INCLUDE THE ABOVE FILE NUMBER. IF THE ITEM IS CONTINUED TO ANOTHER HEARING BECAUSE THE AGENDA IS NOT COMPLETED, OR FURTHER INFORMATION IS NEEDED, THE DATE OF THE CONTINUED HEARING WILL BE ANNOUNCED ONLY AT THE MEETING. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION MAY BE OBTAINED AT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, 250 FIFTH AVENUE NORTH, EDMONDS (PHONE 771-3202, EXTENSION-252). THE REMOVAL, MUTILATION, DESTRUCTION, OR CONCENOTICE BEFORE THE DATE WARNING! OF THEALMENT H HEARING S A IMISDEMEANOR PUNISHABLE BY FINE AND IMPRISONMENT. THIS NOTICE MAY BE REMOVED AFTER�I�I�� Dw�d m m� S�zZ - THIS PACKET SENT TO HEARING EXAMINER — ON MAY 29, 1987 MEMORANDUM May 29, 1987 TO: James M. Driscoll Hearing Examiner FROM: Duane V. Bowman Assistant City Planner SUBJECT: Variance Request of Dorchester Condominium #V-18-87 In early 1986, you conducted a public hearing on a variance request of B.E. Bedall, Inc., under file #V-29-85, to reduce the required number of parking spaces for the Dorchester Condominium at 1041 5th Ave. S. from 24 spaces to 19 spaces. Your decision to approve the variance request was appealed to the City Council. The City Council, on May 13, 1986, adopted findings of fact denying the variance request. The City then began legal proceedings to correct the parking situation. The City cited the Dorchester Condominium Association for violation of the Edmonds Community Development Code requirements of Chapter 17.40 regarding nonconforming buildings. Edmonds Municipal Court Judge Stephen Conroy found the Dorchester Condominium Association guilty of violating the the Edmonds Community Development Code in April of this year. Judge Conroy suspended sentencing for six months to allow the Association to either remove the landscaping or to reapply for a variance. Attached for your information is a copy of the City Council decision on the previous variance request, your original decision, and the new variance application. 0 r. { Z DECISION OF THE EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL V-29-85 On May 6, 1986, following notice given in accordance with law and ordinance, a public hearing was held by the Edmonds City Council reconsidering its decision thereon of March 5, 1986. Based upon the testimony adduced at the hearing of May 6 and consideration of the record of hearing and the recommendations of its Hearing Examiner in his decision of V-29-85, the City Council enters its decision. Findings of Fact The Council adopts the Findings of Fact as developed by its Hearing Examiner, finding in addition that: 1) The primary motivation in removing parking and adding landscaping was to enhance the value of the subject property and its marketability; and 2) The condominium, at the date of its initial construction, was required to provide one parking space per unit. Currently, the Comprehensive Plan and zoning ordinances of the City require provision of two spaces per unit. Conclusions of Law The Council concludes that the application fails to meet the criteria of Section 20.85.010 of the Edmonds Community Development Code in that: 1) No special circumstances exist with respect to the property to support granting the variance. The subject tract has no special topographical or other feature which differentiates it from other similar developments within the City. The application therefore fails to satisfy the requirement of Section 20.85.010(A) Edmonds Community Development Code; 2) The existing situation represents a self-created hardship by a prior owner and therefore does not qualify as a special circumstance under the criteria of ECDC 20.85.010; 3) The primary and motivating reason for the variance request and the illegal construction which preceded it, was a desire to enhance the market value of the property and its marketability. Granting the variance would therefore extend a special privilege in violation of Section 20.85.010(B), Edmonds Community Development Code; and 4) The variance would alter existing, approved off-street parking previously vested in the subject tract as a nonconforming use. Since the current code requires greater provision for off- street parking, permitting further reductions in off-street parking would not be in conformance with either the Comprehensive Plan or the Zoning Code, therefore violating Section 20.85.010(C) Edmonds Community Development Code. Based thereon the City Council of the City of Edmonds hereby denies application V-29-85. MAYOR, LARRC S. UAUGHTEN ATTEST: j0_"ITY CLERK, JACQUELINE G. PARRETT DECISION V-29-85 - Page 2 is a a FINDINGS AND DECISION OF THE HEARING EXAMINER OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION FILE: V-29-85 OF B. E. BEDALL FOR APPROVAL OF A VARIANCE DECISION: The variance is granted subject to the conditions listed. INTRODUCTION 3 B. E. Bedall, Inc., 400 Boylston Avenue East, Seattle, Washington, 98102, and hereinafter referred to as Applicant, has requested approval of a variance from the required number of parking spaces on property located at 1041 5th Avenue South, Edmonds, Washington, 98020, and more particulary described as set forth in Exhibit A. of these Findings. A hearing on the request was held before the Hearing Examiner of the City of Edmonds on January 2, 1986. At the hearing the following presented testimony and evidence: Duane Bowman Bernard Anderson Planning Dept. 1001 5th Ave. So. City of Edmonds #101 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Joey Cain Roland Scott 1060 6th Ave. So. 1001 5th Ave. So. Edmonds, WA Edmonds, WA 98020 Richard Hibbert Tom Malone 1041 5th Ave. So. 1718 NW 56th St. Edmonds, WA 98020 P.O. Box 70467 Seattle, WA 98107 Jack D.►Stevens 1005 - 5th Ave. S, #301 Leonard G. Reynolds Edmonds, WA 98020 1001 - 5th Ave. S., #306 Edmonds, WA 98020 At the hearing the following exhibits were submitted and admitted as part of the official record of these proceedings: Exhibit 1 - Staff Report of 2 - Applications//Declarations 3 - Legal Description 4 - Photographs " 5 - Vicinity Map 6 - Addendum " 7 - Original Site Plan a 7 "Mt '•W..e`Yi 1'r t .t n,.a...i„+,_. ,._.tR. _i .w -. ....uw+• ,.. ..+ ....,. ...,, u ].,w..... .u.w,..d.xs. l Findings and Decision of the Hearing Examiner of the City of Edmonds Page 2 Exhibit 8 - Reynolds letter 01 9 - Stephen letter of 10 - Anderson letter " 11 Scott letter " 12 - Executive Parking Information 13 - Dorchester Parking Information After due consideration of the evidence presented by the Applicant; evidence elicited during the public hearing; and, as a result of the personal inspection of the subject property and surrounding areas by the Hearing Examiner, the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions constitute the basis of the decision of the Hearings Examiner. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Applicant has requested approval of a Variance for a reduction of parking:, spaces at property located at 1041 5th Avenue South, Edmonds, Washington. (Staff Report) 2. The subject property is a .48 acre parcel of land that is located on the-S.E. corner of 5th Avenue South and Forsyth Lane. The property was originally developed as a multiple family dwelling unit in 1962. There were 19 apartment units in the developed building. According to the building plans and the site plan, at least 22 parking stalls were provided for the multiple family development. The number of parking stalls conformed to the zoning standards at the time of con- struction. (Building plans, Bowman testimony and Staff Report) 3. At the time of the development of the apartment units in 1962, off street parking stalls were provided on the property off of 5th Avenue. According to building plans at least 5 spaces were provided. There were two curb cuts on 5th Avenue that provided access to the five parking stalls. (Bowman testimony) 4. The apartment dwelling was converted to condominium use in 1985. Subsequent to the conversion the property owners have removed the parking area that was located off of 5th Avenue and replace the area with landscaping. As a result of this action the number of effective parking places for the subject property has been reduced by three. (Two of the parking stalls in the parking area off of 5th Avenue were inoperative) (Bowman testimony and Staff Report) 5. The subject property•is zoned RM1.5. For RM1.5 zoned property there must be at least two parking stalls per dwelling unit. Therefore, the existing parking on the subject property is substandard to the current zoning code requirements and is non -conforming. (Section 17.50.02 A2 ECDC, Bowman testimony) 0 Findings and Decision of the Hearing Examiner of the City of Edmonds Re: V-29-85 Page 3 6. In order for the Applicant to be allowed to reduce the number of parking stalls on the subject property and to expand on the non -conforming use of the property a variance is required. (Staff Deport) 7. In order for a variance to be granted in the City of Edmonds the criteria asset forth in Section 20.85.010.of the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) must be adhered to. These criteria include: A. Special circumstances relating to the property must exist necessitating the variance; B. The required variance must not result in a special privilege being granted to the Applicant; C. The variance must be consistent with the comprehensive policy, plan map of the City of Edmonds; D. The variance must be consistent with the purposes of - the zoned district in which the property is located; E. The variance must not be significantly detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, nor injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity of the same zone; F. The variance must be the minimum necessary to allow the same rights enjoyed by other properties in the same zone. (ECDC) 8. There is a nineteen stall parking lot on the east portion of the subject property. The parking stalls are assigned to the individuals who inhabit the condominium units. (Bowman testimony, Malone testimony and parking assignments of Dorchester) 9. In the parking'ilot of the subject property there are trees on the east boundary line. These trees serve no functional pur- pose and impact the parking that occurs on'the lot. In addi- tion at the entrance of the lot is a planter that impacts the use of two parallel parking spaces. The city has recommended that the trees and the planter be removed. (Bowman testimony and Exhibit 6) 10. The parking stalls off of 5th Avenue have been removed and re- placed with landscaping. Prior to their removal these stalls created significant traffic circulation problems because of the small area that was involved. Vehicles were exiting the stalls r Findings and Decision of the Hearing Examiner of the City of Edmonds Re: V-29-85 Page 4 by backing onto 5th Avenue South and disrupting the flow of traffic in that area. Further, two curb cuts were inhibiting the traffic flow of the small parking area and 5th Avenue. (Bowman testimony) 11. Parking is available on 5th Avenue and Forsyth Lane which is immediately north of the subject property. (Bowman testimony) 12. The Comprehensive Policy Plan Map of the City of Edmonds designates the subject property as high density residential. The adjoining properties are also designated as high density residential. (Staff Report) 13.. The City is determined that there is no physical way that additional on -site parking may be provided by the Applicant. Therefore, the City determined that parking must be made available for the residents of the condominium unit by clos- ing curb cuts along Forsyth Lane and thereby allowing Forsyth Lane to be used for -parking purposes. (Bowman testimony) 14. There is no guest parking provided for the condominium.units on the subject property. (Bowman and Malone testimony) 15. The Planning Department of the City of Edmonds recommended approval of the variance subject to the following -conditions: 1. The two curb cuts along 5th Avenue South and the and the one curb cut along Forsyth Lane must be closed per Chapter 18.80.060(c)(3) of the ECDC; 2. In conjunction with the closure of the abandoned curb cuts, new concrete sidewalk panels to match the exist- ing sidewalk must be installed; 3. The trees planted on the east property line and the rear parking lot must be removed and asphalt replaced in cutouts; 4. The planter placed at the rear entrance to the parking lot must be removed in order to provide for a minimum of four feet to allow two parallel parking places more maneuvering room; 5. The Applicant must comply with all architectural design board requirements. (Staff Report) 0 ".'�'��� .,:.�.��' f+r,. c.n .�... _e.M..".�,_._Y,tn."{G _.....; :.[_l u,,... ....._:.. .,.._._ ., ...: ��;,..,.� ..�..„ _, ... .....a.N.11.i.�*.t.,w.�. �,.I ...t.........,. A. .. ,._,« .�..r, z._.. ..s... .,.,...r.�.,.a...e...._.....,..a......,......,...r.a.�...�..,.__,.,s.�.......,. ,. ..... ..d.._. 1 Findings and Decision of the Hearing Examiner of the City of Edmonds Re: V-29-85 Page 5 16. Opposition to the granting of the Variance for the reduction of the number of parking spaces at the subject property was voiced by residents of the Executive Condominium which is directly north of the subject property across Forsyth Lane. The opposition contended that the reduction of the parking spaces had resulted in parking problems in the vicinity; disruption of sight distance for traffic entering 5th Avenue off of Forsyth Lane; interference with access into the Executive Conominium parking lot; and, the encouragement of the use of 5th Avenue for parking purposes. (Residents of the Executive Condominium) 17. The president of the Homeowners Association of the Executive Condominium submitted that there are 40 parking stalls for the use by the residents - at the Executive. This number is in compliance with the existing zoning standards for the City of Edmonds. In addition there are 4 extra parking spaces that are used for short term guest parking. (Anderson testimony) 18. The residents of the Executive objected to the Variance on the grounds that it wasi)reducing the number of parking places available for the Dorchester who have substandard parking and * reating more distruption to the area. (Residents of the Executive) 19. A spokesman for the applicant submitted that there was adequate parking for the residents of the Dorchester Condominium which is the name• of the condominium on the subject property. According to the spokesman, he has experienced no difficulty in parking either in the rear parking lot of the Dorchester or on-5th Avneue or Forsyth Lane. (Malone testimony) 20. A representative of the City of Edmonds submitted that the removal of the parking spaces on 5th Avenue is in conformance with the policy of the City of Edmonds, in that the City has passed ordinances prohibiting parking in street set -backs. The old parking did exsist in the street set -back. Thus, with the transformation of the old parking spaces to landscaping the proposal is more in conformance with the City zoning code. (Bowman testimony) 21. Representatives of the Executive Condominium expressed concern about the establishment of a precedent for allowing parking on 5th Avenue. According to the various witnesses, much _ �...YK'_.Iu r._w....�r..xa.. 5.�..r.!i:}. .»x•.tu, ...T va..u.�...4. ..v.s ,. .. ..�}... ,<.�.. M1 ,lL�... r.. vn n. e...i_.0 M Findings and Decision of the Hearing Examiner of the City of Edmonds Re: V-29-85 Page 6 development is occuring in the area and the reduction of off- street parking mandates the necessity for parking congestion on 5th Avenue. CONCLUSIONS 1. The application is for the the approval of a Variance for the reduction of off-street parking spaces on property located at 104.1 - 5th Avenue South, Edmonds, Washington. The specific Variance requested is for a reduction of 5 off-street parking stalls on the subject property. 2. The subject property was constructed in 1962. At the time of construction the standards for parking for RM1.5 property was different from that which exists today. As a result, less than 2 parking spaces per unit for each condominium on the subject property exists. With the requested Variance there would be a further reduction of the number of stalls. 3. In order for a Variance to be granted within the City of Edmonds the criteria as set forth in section 20.85.010 must be satisfied. The request satisfies these criteria. 4. Special circumstances do exist by the granting of a Variance. While there will be a reduction of parking stalls and an ex- pansion of a nonconforming use, the aesthetic improvements to to 5th Avenue will be provided. In addition, there will be a reduction in traffic congestion resulting from the off-street stalls on 5th Avenue. 5. Special circumstances also exist for the gVanting- of a Variance. The old parking stalls that have been removed off of 5th Avenue were in the street set -back. The City of Edmonds has passed ordinances establishing a law prohibiting parking in street set -backs. With the removal of the parking stalls, there is conformity with this ordinance. 6. The granting of a Variance will not result in a grant of a special privilege. The improved aesthetics, the termination of traffic hazards and the elimination of parking in street set -backs results in a benefit to the City of Edmonds. 7. The Variance as requested is consistent with the high density residential designation .i.n the comprehensive plan and in part- icular those found in section 15.20.005 in the Edmonds Com- munity Development Code. i M Findings and Decision of the Hearing Examiner of the City of Edmonds Re: V-29-85 Page 7 8. The requested Variance is not detrimental to other properties in the area and does not create a significant impact to the public. 9. The requested Variance is the minimum necessary f r the map- ust plicant to develop the property. However the app provide for more parking on Forsyth Lane with the elimination .one curb cut. 10. The Planning Department of the City of Edmonds has recommended approval subject to the conditions listed. 11. The testimony in opposition to the requested Variance has been noted above. DECISION Based upon the preceding Findings of Fact and Conclusions, the testimony and evidence submitted at the public hearing, and upon the, impressions of the Variance forranreductionrontis hereby the number ofdered that off-street the requested Vari ton, is parking spaces at 1401 - 5th Avenue South, Edmonds, Washing granted. This specific Variance granted is for a reduction of 5 off- street parking spaces on the subject property as it fronts.on 5th Avenue. This Variance is granted subject to the following conditions. 1. The 2 curb cuts along eclosedper chapter tbp'South the 18.80curb 060(c)(3) along Forsyth Lane must of the Edmonds Community Development Code. 2. Wherever the applicant closes curb cuts, he must install new sidewalk panels to match the existing sidewalk. 3. The applicant must remove all trees that have been oplanted on the east property line in the rear parking lot he subject property. They must be removed and asphalt must in the tree cutouts. of 4. The planter that has been placed at the rear ero�adeemore the parking lot.must be remonved in order to p lot. maneuverability of vehicles in the rear parking 5. The applicant must comply with all Architectural Design Board requirements. 6. The applicant is required to pay all necessary permit fees u Findings and Decision of the Hearing Examiner of the City of Edmonds Re: V-29-85 Page 8 in securing the Variance. Further, he will be liable any fines that the City imposes because of his failur secure the necessary permits prior to contruction. rnMMF.NTS The above Variance has been granted because it is the impressic the Hearing Examiner that the request satisfies the criteria for the granting of Variances as set forth in section 20.85.010. This decision was difficult because of -the conflicting testimony of the witnesses. The residents of the Dorchester Condominium testified that there are no parking problems and that adequate parking does exist. It was the position of these residents that the elimination of the off-street parking on 5th Avenue was aesthetic improvement and did not impact parking in the area. On the other hand the res- idents of the Executive expressed concern about parking impacts caused by the removal of the parking spaces at the Dorchester. The Executive residents'also were concerned about future use of 5th Avenue South as a parking area. Because of the conflicting views of the various witnesses, it became incumbent upon the Hearing Examiner to visit the site. This author- ity granted him in section 20.100.020 section 3 was exercised at least three times. On all visits, it was apparent that there was adequate parking & that there was no lack of guest parking available to the guests of the Dorchester or the Executive Condominiums on Forsyth Lane or 5th Avenue. It is admitted that these visits do not constitute a complete and accurate survey, but, together with the testimony of the residents of Dorchester Condominium and applicants representative, it can be reasonably assumed that adequate parking exists. The .City receives a benefit from the granting of a Variance. Parking within the set -back is eliminated. Furzner, the aesthetic benefits to the City have been noted above. The one disturbing factor of this Variance, however, is that the applicantproceeded to do the work without acquiring the necessary land use permit. This Variance in no way should be interpreted as an approval of the applicant's actions without a permit. Had the requested Variance not met the criteria of section 20.85.010 the applicant would have been required to remove the landscaping and re- construct the parking stalls. Findings and Decision of the Hearing Examiner of the City of Edmonds Re: V-29-85 Page 9 Entered this 29th day of J'Anuary-1 1986, pursuant to the authority granted the Hearing Examiner under Chapter 20.100 of the Community Development Code of the City of Edmonds. �o-,AA 9---;, 1A ES M. DRI,5COLL H aring Examiner Written appeals alleging specific error of fact or other grounds for appeal may be filed with the Planning Department, City of Edmonds, Civic Center, Edmonds, Washington, 98020, within four- teen (14) days of the date of the Hearing Examiner's final action. In this matter any appeal must be received by the Department prior to 5:00 p.m. on February 12, 1986. 0 �y.4 Yoh .a. ..�� � d� � ..... ..m.-....�......4,. faa...i�......1V..f.:..A11..cG'.f.u'�r.�:.,..i�a.3.- ui'r.:.;xr..rL... rt.i+:.F..u.....-.�.u1 a.... _..... r..._.......c....l - PLEASE PRINT YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS BELOW IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM AND/OR WISH TO RECEIVE A COPY OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S FINDINGS OF FACT V-18-87 DORCHESTER CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION Variance to reduce the number of required parking spaces from 24 to 19 for the condominium at 1041 5th Avenue S. NAME ADDRESS (Include city and zip code) A L u- r c IV JUN 19,41981 PLANNING DEPT. CITY OF EDIVIONDB LARRY S. NALIGHTEN MAYOR 250 5th AVE. N. - EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 98020 (206) 771-3202 HEARING EXAMINER FINDINGS A ..ND Dl;'-J.S'ION 1 -1 1i. A F' lIbl'Ll EX, LINER CITY OF' EDMONDS IN THE MATTER CF THl'-1 APPLICATION FILE: V-18-87 OF THE DORCHESTI:R CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION FOR AP-PROVAL OF A. VARIANCE DECISION: The is granted ,3ubjech to the- conditions lis 1, e d. IN' The Dorchester ClInd0lo-ill-i-laill AssociaLJ01-1, 1041 - 5th Avenue S, Editionds, Washington, r. fcrr(..-!d tc-) as Appl-ican-t., has requested -rom 1:�I,:? re'(� -ig I - -ber of parking spaces f 1., 4 r e- d nurt approval or a v.a.r..:L... 'irtionds, Washirigton on property lo(2-:1 r S, Er- 98020. A hearing oii the was; of the City of At the hear-Lng the arid ,­,,ridence: Duane Bc)vijl,!,.L!i Richarel Hibbert Planning 'Dc.pt.- 1041 - 5th Avenue S City of Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 1:31 01 2 0 lBetty Hilbert Rol, rid Scc!-_I_ .1041 - 5th Avenue S 1001 - 5L1: S WA 980210 EdmoncJs, WA Bornard Anderson .1 Harley O'Neil 10()1 - Sth Avenue S .1041 - 5i'Ji #101 E,diaorids., WA 98020 Edmonds, W' 9 0 2:", D a. v i d. j] a- h n Jenny Daivenport. .1041. - 5th Avenue, [:,'dmonds, WA 98020 At -the, hear.inq. *l,--;:-".; r. %fiore- subli-ii-tt-ed and adm.itted r o c. C'. + L *_i as parl� Of e 0 .G w..re,t Jf E � 1 1 1 Findings and Decision of the Hearing Examiner of the City of Edmonds RE: V-18-87 Page 2 Exhibit 1 - Staff Report 2 - Memorandum of City, May 29, 1987 " 3 - Decision of the City Council on March 5, 1986 " 4 - Decision of Hearing Examiner in original application .5 - Application " 6 - Declaration of Applicants 7 - Site Plan " 8 - Vicinity Map 9 - Memorandum of the City, June 4, 1987 10 - Letter of B o D of Executive Condominium " 11 - Davenport letter After due consideration of the evidence presented by the Applicant; evidence elicited during the public hearing; and, as a result of the personal inspection of the subject property and surrounding L areas by the Hearing Examiner, the following Findings of Fact i and Conclusions constitute the basis of the decision of the Hearing Examiner. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Applicant has requested approval of a Variance for a reduction of parking spaces at property located at 1041 - 5th Avenue S, Edmonds, Washington 98020. (Staff Report) 2. The subject property is a .48 acre parcel of land that is located on the SE corner of 5th Avenue S and Forsyth Lane. The property was originally developed as a multiple family dwelling unit in 1962. There were 19 apartment units in the developed building. According to the building plans and the site plan, at lease 22 parking stalls were provided for the multiple family development. The number of parking stalls conformed to the zoning standards at the time of construction. (Building plans, Bowman testimony and Staff Report) 3. At the time of the development of the apartment units in 1962, off street parking stalls were provided on the property off ith Avenue. According to building plans at least 5 spaces were provided. There were 2 curb cuts on 5th 0 r Findings and Decisiu,i of the Hearing Examiner of the City of Edmonds RE: V-18-87 Page 3 Avenue that provided access to the five parking stalls. (Bowman testimony) 4. The apartment dwelling was converted •to condominium use in 1985. Subsequent to the conversion the property owners have removed the parking area that was located off 5th Avenue and replaced the area with landscaping. As a result of this action the number of effective parking places for the subject property has been reduced by three. (Two of the parking stalls in the parking area off 5th Avenue were inoperative.) (Bowman testimony and Staff Report) 5. The subject property is zoned RM1.5. For RM1.5 zoned pro- perty there must be at least two parking stalls per dwelling unit. Therefore, the existing parking on the subject property is substandard to the current zoning code requirements and is non -conforming. (Section 17.50.02 A2 ECDC, Bowman testimony) 6. In order for the Applicant to be allowed to reduce the number of parking stalls on the subject property and to expand on the non -conforming use of the property a variance is required. (Staff Report) 7. In order for a variance to be granted in the City of Edmonds •the criteria as set forth in Section 20.85.010 of the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) must be adhered to. These criteria include: A. Special circumstances relating to the property must exist necessitating the variance; B. The required variance must not result in a special privilege being granted to the Applicant; C. The variance must be consistent with the comprehensive policy plan map of teh City of Edmonds; D. The variance must be consistent with the purposes of the zoned district in which the property is located; E. The variance must not be significantly detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, nor injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity of the same zone; F. The variance must be the minimum necessary to allow the same rights enjoyed by other properties in the same zone. (ECDC) 0 Findings and Decision of the Hearing Examiner of the City of Edmonds RE: V-18-87 Page 4 8. There is a nineteen stall parking lot on the east portion of the subject property. The parking stalls are assigned to the individuals who inhabit the condominium units. (Bowman testimony, and parking assignments of Dorchester) 9. In the parking lot of the subject property there are trees on the east boundary line. These trees serve no functional purpose and impact the parking that occurs on the lot. In addition, at the entrance of the lot is a planter that impacts the use of two parallel parking spaces. The City has recom- mended that the trees and the planter be removed. (Bowman testimony and Exhibit 6) 10. The parking stalls off of 5th Avenue have been removed and replaced with landscaping. Prior to their removal these stalls created significant traffic circulation problems because of the small area that was involved. Vehicles were exiting the stalls by backing onto 5th Avenue S and disrupting the flow of traffic in that area. Further, two curb cuts were inhibiting the traffic flow of the small parking area and 5th Avenue. (Bowman testimony) 11. On January 29, 1986, the Hearing Examiner of the City of Edmonds granted a variance for the reduction of the number of parking places. The approved variance was appealed to the Edmonds City Council on May 6, 1986. The Council overturned approval and denied the application for the variance. The City initiated legal proceedings to correct the parking situation and cited the Applicant for violation of the ECDC requirements of Chapter 17.40 regarding non -conforming buildings. The Appli- cant was found guilty of violating the ECDC. A deferred sentence of six months was granted to allow the Applicant to remove the landscaping or -to reapply for a variance. The Applicant opted to reapply for a variance. (Exhibit 1, 2 and 3) 12. In the application the Applicant has requested reduction in the off-street parking from 24 to 19 spaces. Subsequent to the application, the Applicant and a neighboring property at the Executive Condominium, have reached an agreement of the variance. (Exhibit 9) 13. The City has reviewed -the requested variance and has recommended approval subject to the following conditions: 1) Two additional parking stalls shall be placed in the rear parking lot. These stalls shall comply with all code required dimensions. Findings and Decision of the Hearing Examiner of the City of Edmonds RE: V-18-87 Page 5 2) The two curb cuts along 5th Avenue S and one curb cut along Forsyth Lane must be closed per Chapter 18.80.030 C3 of the ECDC. 3) In conjunction with the closure of the abandoned curb cuts, new concrete sidewalk panels to match the existing sidewalk must be installed. (Exhibit 8) 14. The City submitted at the public hearing that although they are willing•to accept two parking stalls in the rear parking lot, -the ideal situation would be recapturing three. (Bowman testimony) 15. A resident of the Dorchester Condominium submitted that if the City is willing to recapture two spaces, the desirable method of doing so is to restripe the existing stalls and preserve the entry way of the parking lot. The entry way of the parking lot, according to the witness, provides some aesthetic relief to the lot. (O'Neil testimony) 16. A witness submitted that a compact car can be located in a small space under a stairway on the spot. This allows for an additional parking space •that is often utilized. (Daven- port testimony) 17. The representatives of the Executive Condominium testified to be in support of the modification and the variance. (Scott testimony, Anderson testimony) CONCLUSIONS The application is for the approval of a variance to reduce the number of parking spaces available at the Dorchester Condominium at 1041 - 5th Avenue S, Edmonds, Washington 98020. The request is for the reduction of the required 24 parking spaces to 19 spaces. 1. In order for a variance to be granted the criteria as set forth in ECDC 20.85.010 must be satisfied. With conditions that criteria is satisfied. 2. Currently there are 19 spaces in the rear parking lot. The City has indicated that they are willing to support a reduction of the required 24 spaces if two additional parking stalls are placed in •the rear parking lot. 3. Special circumstances exist for the granting of a variance. Because the parking lot is well established and because of •the agreement between the joint property owners, circumstances J Findings and Decision of the Hearing Examiner of the City of Edmonds RE: V-18-87 Page 6 warrant the granting of a variance. 4. The granting of a variance will not be the granting of a special privilege. It will provide solutions to the parking problems for the Dorchester Condominium and the Executive Condominium. 5. The requested variance is consistent with the zoning codes of the City of Edmonds and also the comprehensive plan desig- nation. 6. The requested variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or injurious or detrimental to other properties in •the area. 7. The variance is the minimum necessary to allow the same rights enjoyed by other properties in this zone. n7rTPTnM Based upon the preceding Findings of Fact and Conclusions; the testimony and evidence submitted at the public hearing; and, upon the impressions of the Hearing Examiner at a site view, it is hereby ordered that the requested variance for a reduction of the required number of parking spaces for the Dorchester Condominium at 1041 - 5the Avenue S, Edmonds, Washington 98020 , be granted subject to the following conditions: 1. The number of parking stalls required may be reduced to 21 stalls. 2. The Applicant is to recapture •two additional parking stalls in the rear parking lot. The recapture can be through the removal of vegetation at the entry way, or •through restriping of the parking lot. If the parking lot is restriped, provisions can be made for the parking of compact cars. It is urged that the Applicant review the option of striping prior to the option of destroying the entryway. 3. The two curb cuts along 5th Avenue S, and the one curb cut along Forsyth Lane must be closed per Chapter 18.80.060 (C)3, ECDC. 4. In conjunction with the closing of the abandoned curb cuts, new concrete sidewalk panels to match the existing sidewalk must be installed. 4 DONE AND DATED this day of i__ 11-1_11'1j�_52 , 1987. 1 J tS M. DRISCOLL ear ' rig Examiner, CitN of Edmonds NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL Written appeals alleging specific error of fact or other grounds for appeal may be filed with the Planning Department, City of Edmonds, Civic Center, Edmonds, Washington, 98020, within fourteen (14) days of the date of the Hearing Examiner's final action. In this matter any appeal must be received by -the Department prior to 5:00 p.m. on July 2, 1987. "^,`'? 1K.b.1t...,.. ,.�.i.S,.,�..�.iuwZu+.. w. .e_.�.__.. .__._.. a....x... ,__�,�.�Y..v.. .... �: ........... ...........�................,,.....A..:.._�I.__.... _.... ._. .. ...._...�.., _._. ....._.., �.........r._..�__......�....._...�..i...�....�.,c..�.,.......�r.,......4 .... ......�. �i......-d �. February 11, 1988 L MEMO TO: Mary Lou Block 19cp8 Planning Division Manager p/'q��••,, n FROM: Linda Martin Council Assistant SUBJECT: Dorchester Apartments Laura Hall inquired, about the status of the restoration of the Dorchester Apartments, at the February 2nd Council Meeting. Initially, Scott Snyder indicated that he would report back to the Council on what date restoration was to be finalized. Today Scott telephoned to say that the owners of the Dorchester had one year in which to comply or file for a variance. The owners elected to file for a variance. According to Scott the Hearing Examiner approved the variance. Would you please provide me with a copy of the Hearing Examiner's decision and I will forward it to the Council. Thanks. 0 4 ..Wandering Itotem pole me .finds to "d rmcls takes it, .i r�ud g g in l albeit y g By SHARON WOOTTON Herald Writer fter a vagabond life, a totem pole will get a permanent home in Edmonds — as soon as it can pass the permit process. The Western red cedar pole, about 30 feet high,18 inches in diameter and weighing 900 pounds, has been a nomad for a few decades. Retired logger and woodworker Tim Davis, using only hand tools, carved the pole for Lawrence Kunkel of Seattle, says Douglas Egan, who researched the pole's 'history. for the Edmonds/South Snohomish County Histori- cal Society. When completed, it was taken to the Kunkels' summer Cmved Ea TOTEM, from Page 1 A nity services building. But how to move a 900-pound The pole's final resting spot was totem pole embedded in 5 feet of not decided upon easily. concrete? GTE -Northwest was The Edmonds Arts Commission was not enthusiastic about locating recruited for the task, although the pole on the triangle near the workers had to take a chain saw to museum, on Main Street near the it. the ferry terminal or Olympic After 40 years and many travels, Beach Park. The group preferred it the pole needed restoration as well to be placed in a more natural as a new home. Society member.. setting as an item of interest rather David Crow became project leader than as a work of art. and gathered volunteers to scrape, Members did not want the pole in sand and in some cases, rebuild the art collection because the figures. Ove and Eleanor Green artist's identity could not be painted the pole. documented and the bright colors Once refurbished, the society are not typical of Northwest Indian offered the pole to the city of art. Edmonds. The city, arts commis- In the end, the council agreed to ? home. Although the pole has 1939 carved at its base, Egan said 'Kunkel's son, Kenneth, told him he believed that was the °date when his family acquired. the. :vacation.property, and A :that the pole wasn't completed and erected until about 1946. Kunkel instructed Davis to put an eagle on the top, and Davis researched other figures, to represent Northwest animals, fishes, birds and flowers. Kunkel died, the property was sold in 1950, and the pole came back to Seattle, where it was sold to Ace Motel, 8512 Aurora Ave. In 1974, Gary Card bought the totem pole and moved it to family property at 9910 Edmonds Way (Westgate). Card owned the Totem Fish and Chips Restaurant. When the business closed in 1985, the pole had to come down. Egan learned of the pole's misfortune and arranged for Card to donate the pole to the Edmonds Historical Museum. See TOTEM, Page 2A sion and society negotiated for the accept the pole, apply for a height appropriate site — on the grass variance from the hearing near the Civic Center, between the examiner and approved $500 for executive offices and the commu- installation. e has a new homemmf nal Y I'-I_o,Tds By DAMES BUSH standard architectural review he added. businesm) in Seattle. arch ss sanary Card pand EDMONDS —with the coopera. must first be completed, installed in the ed the pole in moved it tion of the hearing examiner and When the pole is executive outside Westgate Totem Chips on architectural design board, the grassy area between the city's totem pole may have found offices and the community ser- Edmonds Way. Card donated the pole to the a home. vices building, it will have surviv- a low-key historical society last December, The 30-foot red cedar pole, ed two businesses and its location according to Doug Egan, society donated to the city by the local battle to keep representative. The pole was Edmonds -South Snohomish Coun- public — but not too public. sanded, cleaned and patched ty Historical Society, should be erected at the civic center next The pole, carved and erected in 1939, originaHY under the direction of society member Dave Crow, then painted month, according to Mayor Larry approximately in front of the Ace Motel, at by Ovie and Eleanor Green. Naughten. The approval of a stood the 85th Street and Aurora Avenue The.society approached the city height variance and city's to offer the pole as a gift for public display. The donation was welcomed, but the siting process ran into a snag with the Edmonds Arts Commission, which super- vises the city's art collection. THE ARTS COMMISSION had two issues to resolve about the, pole: whether it should be includ- ed in the city's art collection and where it should be placed. The commission balked at ac- cepting the totem pole into the art collection, mainly because its origin and the identity of the artist who carved it could not be documented. Egan said the socie- ty has conducted an unsuccessful search for information on the pole's history. "The artist is unknown and the carving is not truly authentic," said Linda McCrystal, city arts coordinator. She noted that the "bright, primary colors" which decorate the pole are not typical of 4 Northwest Indian art. The pole contains nine principle carvings: a wings -spread eagle, hawk, wolf, sea gull, bear cubs, salmon, mermaid, Indian in head- dress and a falcon or eagle. The pole measures 18 inches in width at its base and tapers to 12 inches at the top. The intial society request was to have the pole placed in the plan- ting triangle at 5th Avenue and Bell Street, but the commission objected because of possible view obstruction and incompatibility with area landscaping, McCrystal said. "Also, it gains a lot more impor- tance in that particular location than that craft work deserves," she added. The society's next two siting suggestions, Olympic Beach Park and on Main Street near the ferry dock also received negative responses from the commission. "We would like to reserve those parks for a truly good piece — quality artwork," McCrystal said. The current* site was proposed as a compromise, Naughten said, . as it is in a public place, yet does not overly showcase the pole. WHEN NAUGHTEN and Egan submitted the proposal to the City Council last month, however, some members were unimpressed by the compromise site. "It'd be a lot more of an attract- tion in the middle of downtown," said Councilman oy s om. "Why do we go through all this I restoration to hide it?," agreed Councilwoman Laura Ball. Despite these reservations, the council unanimously accepted the gift of the pole from the historical society. Egan said the society will bear up to $500 of the cost of installing the pole and will place a historical plaque on it once it is erected. Un- til the hearing examiner and ADB approve the proposed site, the pole is being stored in the Edmonds Lumber Company warehouse. Naughten says the city is pleas- ed with the gift and notes that children from local daycare centers and summer day camps often gather. on the grassy area where the pole will be located to eat lunch. "It's a very interesting pole - the kids will love it," he said. CiTY OF EDMONDS NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING THE HFAlel"o ivatsW FILE NO. - V# 70 4p ZONE DISTRICT WILL HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE FOLLOWING APPLICATION: 0 THE HEARING WILL BEGIN AT 7• M., IN THE PLAZA MEETING ROOM, LIBRARY BUILDING, 650 MAIN STREET, EDMONDS, WASHINGTON. IF YOU WISH TO COMMENT ON THIS PROPOSAL, YOU MAY COME TO THE HEARING AND SPEAK. YOU MAY ALSO WRITE A LETTER STATING YOUR VIEWS WHICH WILL BE CONSIDERED AT THE HEARING. PLEASE ADDRESS THE LETTER TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND INCLUDE THE ABOVE FILE NUMBER. IF THE ITEM IS CONTINUED TO ANOTHER HEARING BECAUSE THE AGENDA IS NOT COMPLETED, OR FURTHER INFORMATION IS NEEDED, THE DATE OF THE CONTINUED HEARING WILL BE ANNOUNCED ONLY AT THE MEETING. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION MAY BE OBTAINED AT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, 250 FIFTH AVENUE NORTH, EDMONDS (PHONE 771-3202, EXTENSION 252). THE REMOVAL, MUTILATION, DESTRUCTION, OR CONCEALMENT OF WA R I N G ! OF THE H ARING STA THIS PUNISHABLE BY FINE AND IMPRISONMENT. THIS NOTICE MAY BE REMOVED AFTER Aowsor eo, tqv7 poster a- n -7/�A7 � � ..,�..w ii..._.._.�... �.I.w...s.o..�a....a.........��rni..x..iu..i..w.w..�.+K_<w._i..�',..+w�m.....�...t .a, a ... v.w..ltlu:..�L« .., 4 Gerald Perry, Jr./Res. 217 5th Ave. N. #D '. Edmonds, WA 98020 Loren Saxby 7014-191st P1. S.W. Lynnwood, WA 98036 Resident 201 5th Ave. N. #A Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident 201 5th Ave. N. #B Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident 201 5th Ave. N. #C Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident 201 5th Ave. N. #D Edmonds, WA 98020 Elmer Harris/Resident 207-5th Ave. N. Edmonds, WA 98020 Evelyn Curtis 742 Melody Lane Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident/Owner 211 5th Ave. N. Edmonds, WA 98020 Taylor Anderson 2108 Alki Ave. S.W. #207 Seattle, WA 98116 V, 3 Resident/Owner 223 5th Ave. N. Edmonds, WA 98020 Grahame Shrader/Res. 233 5th Ave. N. Edmonds, WA 98020 Leonne Lundgren 510 Nancy Circle Reno, NV 89503 Resident/Owner 217 5th Ave. N. #A Edmonds, WA 98020 Richard White/Resident 217-5th Ave. N. #B Edmonds, WA 98020 Cascade Savings & Loan White, Richard #0510016645 2828 Colby Everett, WA 98201 Margaret L. Winters 10058 Lancaster Drive Sun City, AZ 85351 Resident/Owner 217 5th Ave. N. #C Edmonds, WA 98020 Pioneer Bank Perry, Gerald L., Jr. #02-52001425 4111-200th S.W. Lynnwood, WA 98036 r CbinoItb�=*otttb *I1obalni!6b cottutp 'igtoricar *ocietp (A NON PROFIT CORPORATION..INC 197.7 P. O. BOX 52 EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 98020 November 10 1986 EDMONDS HISTORICAL MUSEUM 118 • 51'H AVE. N.. EDMONDS. WASH. Hon. Larry S. Naughten, Mayor, City of Edmonds, Civic Center, Edmonds 98020 Dear Larry ; With regard to our totem pole project ; The Society Board has voted to donate the pole to the City of Edmonds, for erection on the triangular plot at 5th N and Bell St. ,gith donation of the pole, they recommend that this un— named plot be designated as MUSEL11 PLACE. As you know the plot adjoins the museum property, and this would compliment and help to identify the Museum and I believe would be very appropriate. The Society will donate an appropriate plaque to be installed on the premises and otherwise participate in dedication ceremonies. We have had a crew working for several months in restoration work on the pole and it is now in fine condition. !ECEIVED L! V N tAvl u;rvu Offices If the foregoing ideas meet with City approval, I suggest we plan on a target date of early spring, which will allow time and allowance for good weather. General Telephone, who moved the pole"from Westgate to Edmonds Lumber, will I believe, move it again to its new location. I am enclosing some sketches I have made, being ideas for development of the plot, also copy of some history about the pole that may be useful. It has been suggested that some limitations be placed on parking around the plot that would improve its image. Thanks in advance for your interest and cooperation in the Society and the Museum. Sincer 7� i Douglas gan Chairman. 11 SOCIETY TO PERPETUATE TILE ,NII:AIOR)' AND SPIRIT OF OUR PIONEERS; TO IDENTIFY AND PRESERVE IIIST01ICA1. DOCUMENTS, RELICS, AND INCIDENTS; AND TO ENCOURAGE HISTORICAL RESEARCH, TODAY AND T'O.1I010R0II" F1 F' 0 FILE NO. V-24-87 APPLICANT City of Edmonds AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF WASHINGTON ss. COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH Susan Painter being first duly sworn, on oath deposes and says: That on the 23rd day of July —,19 87 the attached Notice of Public Hearing was mailed as required to adjacent property owners, the names of which were provided by the applicant. Signed P&4, L Subscribed and sworn to before me this,4-)ti�) day of 19 "I, ix Notary Public in and for the, State of Wash*In ton. '�i Residing at MY COMMISSION EXPIRES 6.16-99, 0 ■ STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss. COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH ) Duane Bowman and says: FILE NO. V-24-87 APPLICANT City of Edmonds AFFIDAVIT OF POSTER being first duly sworn, on oath, deposes That on the 23rd day of July , 19 87 , the attached Notice of Public Hearing was posted as prescribed by Ordinance, and in any event, in the Frances Anderson Center and Civic Center, and where applicable on or near the subject property. Si gne Subscribed and sworn to before me this �..�.��f day of v 0^ Notary Public in and for the ,State'of Washington. Residing at My. COMMISSION EXPIRES 6-16-89. n i EID IYi®iidSEGv PLANNING DEPT,, Cityof Ed Gary McComas -Fire INTER -OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE ,G w�yRKS Bobby Mills - P.W. Dan Smith/Jerry Hauth - Eng. 7/20/87 Duane Bowman — DATE TO FROM SUBJECT V-24-87 VARIANCE TO ALLOW 30' TOTEM POLE AT 250 FIFTH AVE. N. CODE HEIGHT LIMIT: 25'. HEARING DATE: AUGUST 6, 1987 PLEASE RESPOND WITH YOUR COMMENTS NO LATER THAN JULY 24, 1987. THANKS. i „+,�('kP 3,1 • 'r + y�l.P. n^k 2 . t .n f i.....,.,......:.�. �......, .._.... ...........w_�..� __...._....._.._ ..__..._ .._.4 Rai X4... City of Edmonds Gary McComas - Fire M.'/ INTER -OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE Bobby Mills - P.W. Dan Smith/Jerry Hauth - Eng. 7/20/87 Duane Bowman DATE TO FROM - - R1_V-E D SUBJECT JUL 21 1987 V-24-87 VARIANCE TO ALLOW 30' TOTEH POLE AT 250 FIFTH AVE. N . Pi_.ANNINr., DEPT. CODE HEIGHT LIMIT: 25'. HEARING DATE: AUGUST 6, 1987 PLEASE RESPOND WITH YOUR COMMENTS NO LATER THAN JULY 24, 1987. THANKS. O �.O,v` u-�� �� � p�V � � •, J U 1. 20 1987 FD.MONDS FIRE DFEL y. llI.. r 1 t RECEVIED City of Edmonds JUL 2 0 1987 ENGINEERING Gary McComas - Fire M. INT R-OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE Bobby Mills - P.W. Dan Smith/Jerry Hauth - Eng. Duane Bowman _ DATE 7/20/87 TO FROM JUDJCV 1 V-24-87 VARIANCE TO ALLOW 30' TOTEM POLE AT 250 FIFTH AVE. N. CODE HEIGHT LIMIT: 25'. HEARING DATE: AUGUST 6, 1987 PLEASE RESPOND WITH YOUR COMMENTS NO LATER THAN JULY 24, 1987. THANKS, y. � ^�v- ^~� �� �"�� '�^ °��y f�U ' ^^� ` ` F�` U ������� ���| U���|U�MN�������� ' ��'���a� ��� m�mm��=��=�=�m�� ` G° M Com�s Mre M � ' nnb / , oan �m1t�/uerr��auzn _ �no' . ouano aowman _ rnom ' ro n ~..._-- ` ~'^~^~. ^` V-2a-87 V�RzANcc �R0M COoE REVulRco l5! Or LA�o3cAPlNG ' � AL0No 2l2TH sTRc[T s.N.� FUR PR0PEnTY AT 2l2OO-72ND oWc. A. (CG) ' �� ` HcARlNG oATc� �8GUsT 6, l087 �PLE�s[ RE3p0No WzTH YOUn n0MMENTs NO LATcR TH�N uULY 27, lga7' N ~ ~^^^~ ` THIS PACKET SENT TO HEARING EXAMINER ON JULY 30, 1987 EXHIBIT LIST V-24-87 EXHIBIT 1 - STAFF REPORT EXHIBIT 2 - APPLICATION/DECLARATIONS EXHIBIT 3 - VICINITY MAP EXHIBIT 4 - PHOTOGRAPH EXHIBIT 1 STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER FILE: V-24-87 HEARING DATE: August 6, 1987 I. REQUESTED ACTION: Variance to allow totem pole to exceed the permitted height limit of 25' by 5' at 250 5th Ave. N., Edmonds. II. APPLICANT/OWNER: City of Edmonds 250 5th Ave. N. Edmonds, WA 98020 III. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: See Exhibit 2 IV. STAFF FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: A. Description of the Subject Property and Surrounding Area The subject property is located on the northeast corner of the intersection of 5th Ave. W. and Bell Street. The property is developed with the City of Edmonds Civic Center. The City recently accepted the donation of a refurbished 30' totem pole from the Edmonds -South Snohomish County Historical Society. The totem pole was carved in 1939 and was erected in front of a motel along Highway 99 in the Seattle area. It was moved to the Edmonds in 1976 and erected in front of the former Westgate Totem Chips restaurant on Edmonds Way. The City Arts Commission rejected a number of different public locations for displaying the totem pole. It was decided that a location in the lawn area west of the Community Services Building at the Civic Center. Surrounding development is a mixture of multifamily, commercial and single family development. B. Official Street Map Proposed R/W Existing R/W West - 5th Ave. N. 60' 60' C. Conformance to Chapter 20.85.010 1. Special Circumstances Staff Report V-24-87 Page 2 Special circumstances appear to exist in this particular case. The totem pole has been accepted by the City. The proposed location is screened on three sides by buildings and vegetation. 2. Special Privilege The proposed variance does not appear to represent a grant of special privilege. 3. Comprehensive Plan The Comprehensive Policy Plan map designates the subject property as High Density Residential. The proposed variance does not appear to conflict with the purposes of the Comprehensive Plan. 4. Zoning Ordinance The subject property, and the adjacent to the property to the east, is designated on the Zoning Map as Public Use. To the south and west is BC zoning. The adjacent property to the north is RM-1.5. The proposed variance does appear to conflict with the purposes of the zoning ordinance. 5. Not Detrimental The proposed variance does not appear to pose any significant impact to the public or to any near by private property or improvement. 6. Minimum Variance The requested variance does appear to represent a minimum variance request. V. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of V-24-87. The proposed location is a good location for the totem pole. It is screened from view on three sides and will not impact any views. 3 c 1 EXHIBIT 2 FILE„' V-24-87 DATE 711lg7 CITY OF EDMONDS FEE N/A HEARING EXAMINER RECT N/A APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE APO'S 711187 HEARING DATE: 816/87 APPLICANT City of Edmonds ADDRESS_ 250 5th Ave. N. CITY & ZIP Edmonds, WA 98020 PHONE_ 771-3202 INDICATE TYPE OR DEGREE OF INTEREST IN PROPERTY Owner LOCATION OR ADDRESS OF PROPERTY 250 5th Ave. N. LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY All that property identified as Blocks E and F, Plat of , Edmonds; together with the vacated right-of-way of Hebe Way (City of Edmonds Civic Center) VARIANCE REQUESTED: Variance to allow totem pole to exceed the permitted 25' height limit by 5' (301) FOR OFFICE USE ONLY: USE ZONE: Public Use ZONING ORDINANCE REQUIREMENT: 25' Maximum Height Limit Release/Hold Harmless Agreement The undersigned applicant, his heirs and assigns, in consideration for the City processing the application agrees to release, indemnify, defend and hold the City of Edmonds harmless from any and all damages and/or claims .for damages, including reasonable attorneys' fees, arising from any action or inaction is based in whole or in nart upon false, misleading or incomplete information furnished by the applicant, his agents or employees. Permission to Enter Subject Property The undersigned applicant grants his, her or its permission for public officials and the staff of the Citv of Edmonds to enter the subject property for the purpose of inspection and posting attendant to this application. Signature of Applicant, Owner or Representative DECLARATIONS OF APPLICANT Please answer all questions 1. What are the physical characteristics, (i.e. topography, shape of lot, etc.) which create a hardship for you in regard to development of your property? proposedThe totem 1 1 cation is in the lawn area west of the Community ,SPrvices building It is surrounding by either buildings or trees on three sides The pole will be open to view from 5th Ave N. It will not impact the views from --any adjacent property.- 2. How does your property differ from other property in the same vicinity? The subject property is City owned The totem pole has been accepted by the City from the Historical Society. 3. Will this variance be detrimental to the public or damaging to other property or improvements in the vicinity? The totem pole, even at 30' in height, will not impact any nearby private property or improvement. The totem pole has been refurbished and will be screened from view on three sides. 4. What hardships will result to you if the variance is not granted? Will these hardships have been caused by your own action? , This site has been identified as the best location for the totem pole by both the Edmonds Arts Commission and the City Council. S. Can you make reasonable use of your property without the variance? No. The totem pole is limited to a location on public property. The proposed location has been identified as the best spot for erecting the totem pole. mw�eloi�l,f < "At I almll i (Fjnfl r_ ) www� (r It .V 1 • It f' ,J ' �' I 'T\ O { d to cn L It 4 4,1V Wootton CO 0 (D [ ,. It It 4 ,�.Y_tlj .•' lfh 'r O fr♦ l fl l�> J' �1' '/tK� •tY*) Yr+ j,TJt' z.� `yl .F'.r j / r ' '-1 , ! : )r.. - i, 'i.. �I 1 a f Y:•.. •�I �r,t� 7!t'' .1 ` 7.� r :1 r ..'L. 4"v.7 > ,rt .✓V4 Ir .,l1 4. , 1 ( • It 4 ' ' ' f♦{� t t! :i + I (`l� , , .) i• .' i `,l llZC . ( 1 r Y -! AV �pW ' ..,> I {. t 1 t5i wf.i �J t i,. ,' t�I1It • 'V f I ^Ir ♦ ( -( l .• } i 4 >(.y14 b->. I I*Oso I It � fir•, 1"AV d.t ` p r aF ., is y, � I , �Y{! r - y' - �r. a, Lid, t'"�i'.V•A' O FF Y �. •S,� i� 1 C r" r.,y 1 AC d�ir�Yl^ r� Y. t ti � ? �� r'•�'C � 1 +,, l Ir � t yt /� ' > `p" - (�^,;.Yts .!�N!`d'� ISY.1�r`.4''►I'. n Li./e+( 14�: �J� `.• -.-... !. ! i t�� •' I• ••{iY�,,. 'YIt Y•y k, • ?. .IVA +ter l_ too t1l4v tIl'I MatI`,H K t r;ia5 o '4;�, :s�o•.yt fir. 'vl�� ' ���•� ii•. cn rl /1'•�,fiod toto ) ./ LI S.I , to I ; . y J1r ! `r d. r "j 51 ,1 i I M tiI& I u 1'It. I �}6A. •.V . YoS • �`} dyt' r .I � I Ad It ' �to p t.rP 1 fIIIIIIt ✓�; ., •. � r!t ex ,Y, ft ��r19t) j�r��4t., •l i I , t r L`IlIqdr Awl A C% i EXHIBIT 4 rat + 3; P'.6 '� r '� }1 i ✓ u . a t _ i I 2 PLEASE PRINT YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS BELOW IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM AND/OR WISH TO RECEIVE A COPY OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S FINDINGS OF FACT V-24-87 CITY OF EDMONDS Variance to allow totem pole to exceed the permitted height limit of 25' by 5' at 250 5th Ave. W., Edmonds NAME ADDRESS (Include city and zip code) -54�- UWv� 4�C IPVA 1 UWv� 4�C IPVA 1 I M CITY OF EDMONDS 250 5th AVE. N. * EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 98020 * (206) 771-3202 HEARING EXAMINER FIN1".4"INGS AMID REC`OMME'ZNDATIO1,! OF THE HEARING EXAMIN11"R OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS IN THE 01P TIDE APPLICATION i.1 17. 1 !aOR APPROVAL OF A VARIANCE LARRY S. NALIGHTEN MAYOR '9 8 0ep, FILE: V ­ 2" .1 .- 8 7 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended to the City Council of the City of Edmonds that the variance to allow a totem pole to exceed the permitted height limit be granted subject to the t:oaditJ.ons I i's t c--.% d A " NTRODU CT ION r 0, - 5 t I i A ve 111LI (-� N10 r th I �,druo rds City of Edmonds, w,a.t;hington , 98020, and hei. eir!a;L::'-.er ref errek"I t-.*) as App"i icant 1-:Ias• requested. approval of a varticance to t0tePl I'Drile to d exceed the permitted' height limit Of 27) a'*' a`-) 5e t. 'The t ropos,:'ad to '0-e I 1.')C O cil- 250 511-h Avenue North, r:dmonds, W.ashingtori. A hearing on the request'- - was he. -Id be-Iffore the Hearing ng 'RXaminer . I_ ')f Fdmonds S�_ I It I, '� ­;T . OIL the City c-n Auqu '9'( At the hearing the Ea Ilowing preseI-ited testimony and evidence: !--wane Boww'an city c7-th Ave, Nlortf.. E d m o n d t.; WA 1) 020 At the hearing the Eollowing exh.ibits.were submitted and admitted as part of the ofEicial record of this proceeding: on/Decla-ratio-nis .2 pl J ca t-i vicini.ty map P h o -f.- c) t,4 211 8.7 v 4 After due consideration of the evidence presented by the Applicant, and testimony and evidence elicited during the public hearing the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions constitute the basis of the recommendation of the Hearing Examiner. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The City of Edmonds has requested approval of a variance to allow a totem pole to exceed the permitted height limit of 25 feet by an additional 5 feet at 250 - 5th Avenue North, Edmonds, Washington. (Staff report.) 2. The subject property is zoned Public Use. The Planning Department of the City of Edmonds has determined that the permitted height limit for structures in Public Use zones is 25 feet. The Applicant desires to exceed the height limit by an additional 5 feet. (Staff report.) 3. The totem pole has been accepted by the City of Edmonds as a donation. It is a refurbished 30-foot totem pole that was given to the City of Edmonds by the Edmonds - South Snohomish County Historical Society. It is a public structure. (Bowman testimony.) 4. The Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) 17.00.030(C) requires that all public structures must comply with the minimum requirements for any other use. A variance is to.be considered if the structure is not in compliance with minimum requirements. (ECDC.) 5. In order for a variance to be granted within the City of Edmonds, the criteria as set forth in ECDC 20.85.010 must be satisfied. These criteria include: A. Because.of special circumstances relating to the property,•the strict enforcement of the zoning ordinance would deprive the owner of use rights and pri.vileges permitted to other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning. B. The approval of the variance would not be a grant of special privilege to the property in comparison with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning. C. The approval of the.variance.will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Edmonds. D. The approval of the variance will be consistent with the purposes of the zoning ordinance and the zone 'aistrict in which.the property is located. E. The variance as approved or conditionally approved will not be significantly detrimental to the public HE'S RECOMMENDATION RE: V-24-87 Page 2 _........-.v.�..w-...u1u:.v�...�.-.��,,.._r.._._.. r. r.�..... ...e ..e ..... ... �a _..-.e ... e. _..�r.._. ..c....... ... ....a...J�'..i-Sl .......s...r r..���w.. _.. �.. �. _.. ... ....w�. .......v.0 �.u..f.��.............++.uu.u.. �.��...,.14.a... .. .�....,. J.rl� ..,. ez ... health, safety and welfare or injurious to the " property or improvements in the vicinity and same zone. F. The requested variance is the minimum necessary to allow the owner the rights enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning. (ECDC.) 6. Upon acceptance of the totem pole the City of Edmonds Arts Commission inspected various public locations for the purpose of display of the totem pole. After an extensive review, the Arts Commission determined that the lawn area west of the Community Services Building at the Civic Center in the City of Edmonds, Washington, was the most appropriate location for the pole. This area provided landscaping in a natural environment for the location of the totem pole. (Bowman testimony.) 7. The totem pole is 30 feet in height. It was originally carved in 1939 and was completed in 1946. It has been in the City of Edmonds since 1975. It was originally located at the Westgate Totem.Chips restaurant. When that restaurant - ceased operation the pole was given to the City. (Staff report and Bowman testimony.) 8. Special circumstances exist for the allowance of the totem pole. The pole was carved in 1939 and exceeds the 25-foot height restrictions which were not in force at that time. The proposed location is screened on three sides.by buildings and vegetation. (Bowman testimony and Staff report.) 9. The City submitted that the requested variance will not be the grant of a special privilege. (Staff report.) 10. The subject property has a Comprehensive Plan designa- tion of High Density Residential. With its screening and proposed location on the west lawn of the Civic Center it will not be in conflict with this designation. (Staff report and Bowman testimony.) 11. The requested variance will not pose any impact to the public, nor to nearby private properties or. improve- ments. (Bowman testimony.) 12. The requested variance represents the minimum variance request. (Bowman testimony.) 13._ The -Planning Department of the City of Edmonds has recommended approval of the variance. (Staff report.) HE'S RECOMMENDATION RE: V-24-87 Page 3 14. At the public hearing no testimony was presented in opposition to the granting of the variance.' f CONCLUSIONS t. 1. The -application is for'the approval of a variance to .allow a 30-foot totem pole to be located at 250 - 5th Avenue North, Edmonds, Washington. The variance requested is to allow the pole to exceed the permitted height limit by an additional 5 feet. 2. Special circumstances exist for the granting of the variance. Because of the nature of the structure and its proposed location on City property, it will provide a point of interest in the City. It will also be located in an area that will be screened by buildings and vegetation. 3. The granting of the variance is not the grant of a special privilege. 4. The Comprehensive Plan of the City of Edmonds has been reviewed and the proposed variance is in conformance with the purposes of this plan. 5. The requested variance does not conflict with the purposes of the zoning ordinance and in particular with the Public Use zones. 6. The requested variance will not impact the public, nor nearby private properties or improvements. 7. The requested variance represents a minimum variance request. RECOMMENDATION Based upon the preceding Findings of Fact and Conclusions, and the testimony and evidence submitted at the public hearing it is hereby recommended to the City Council of the City of Edmonds that variance V-24-87 be approved. The variance should be approved pursuant to ECDC 17.00.030(C) subject to the following conditions: 1. The Applicant is to comply with any conditions imposed by the Architectural Design Board. 2. All necessary permits must be secured prior to erection of the pole. HE'S RECOMMENDATION RE: V-24-87 Page 4 3 l Entered this 2ist day of August, 1987, pursuant to the authority granted the Hearing Examiner under Chapter 20.100 of the Community Development Code of the City of Edmonds. J S M. DRISCOLL (eAring Examiner NOTICE You are hereby given notice that pursuant to RCW Section 35.63.130 the _foregoing Findings, Conclusions and Recom- mendations have been submitted .to the Mayor and City Council of the City of Edmonds, Washington, for their consideration and approval. Council action on this item will occur at a later date. PROCEDURE FOR RECONSIDERATION Motions for reconsideration should be filed with James M. Driscoll, Hearing Examiner, City of Edmonds, Civic Center, Edmonds, Washington, 98020, within ten business days from the date of these recommendations. The final date for motion for reconsideration is-5 p.m. on September 4, 1987. HE'S RECOMMENDATION RE: V-24-87 Page 5 am tj 0 E X:. H .I H 1 T 2 FIL(jr DATE CITY OF EDMONDS FEE HEARING EXAMINER RECT APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE APO'S � i HEARING DATE: � _ % W APPLICANT�� .j GhOO r� rv,r Kk r' ADDRESS_ jQ-1 - L5i k A v f— S . CITY & ZIP PHONE_ %%J�-,SC��o� /�802-�-V INDICATE TYPE OR DEGREE OF INTEREST IN PROPERTY 0 i,),-, e r LOCATION OR ADDRESS OF PROPERTY Ay e . -S . LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY_ S c> c S T WP P, `% P' & F O 3 1, R I - q C., 9, 9 l6(,:,3FT AJ d- 8'1-IDFT F OF SLi C-TH b OF'T- H Ka O F T 'T ►+ s LOFT TH t,J 16--LO E T TO PO R VARIANCE REQUESTED: // Sej� back "`'O FOR OFFICE USE ONLY: USE ZONE: - ZONING ORDINANCE REQUIREMENT:�- Release/Hold Harmless Agreement The undersigned applicant, his heirs and assigns, in consideration for. the City processing the application agrees to release, indemnify, defend and hold the City of Edmonds harmless from any and all damages and/or claims for damages, including reasonable attorneys' fees, arising from any action or inaction is based in whole or in part upon false, misleading or incomplete information furnished by the applicant, his agents or employees. Permission to Enter Subject Property The undersigned applicant grants his, her or its permission for public officials and the staff of the City of Ed onds to en er the subject property for the purpose of inspection and postinglatvndant to this application. Slg#afure of Applicant, Owner or Representative DECLARATIONS OF APPLICANT Please answer all questions 1. What are the physical characteristics, (i.e. topography, shape of lot, etc.) which create a hardship for you in regard to development of your property? �} sfir e a r,-. r u ►-� S tl-� r n v� a h `��. e rn % A A, e.. o� n" Y h a c k uar-d ar. A Aa n -ike_ Nor` 6 Arrcaex q lire , "T1-,ese 2. How does your property differ from other property in the same vicinity? Dove-, a S ri v,., r u hs '+kro "Q1 k tke, -A -�ke k Y�%�A P-- ©i llUr DGtC'k !oar a --.,A Gi6W, -\ Nor 3. Will this variance be detrimental to the public or damaging to other property or improvements in the vicinity`? 10O, lie �e-e, +ke nAAt+1af1 cdr rly-l::!� ice•-,PrO✓e. CLQ� a rA ►'� C' P ► -1A �e� V-, a r- c P `t"\ P S LA r O C, r- e a S 4. What hardships will result to you if the variance is not granted? Will these hardships have been caused byyour own action? �e- tA)ntild koLve, `e +o reA cTke aclA;he,7v, Cite. +C3 C1 er e_ i A- Gl) CY A )Z j20-S'S'161e- PCr 5 Lk Ad e conA 5tGr u\ 5. Can you make reasonable use of your property without the variance? UU) OtAr 27CIS1 ir�a hOm� iS Gi c� )JL'QrY?GJrt� �- batI\ %e �2C'.l ` ke on Cif a r'1V-\a-1 e)r- %eArnornbo�Vk i-ja-,\AGE w.o e- it I, r L /} - 0 '- -, ^ .r o /1 f' l• I W1 /') A ci*- 1 v- U --� a r' o L\\ r- a ► nL1 M_ EXHIBIT 3 FINDINGS AND DECISION OF THE HEARING EXAMINER OF THE CITY OF ED140NDS IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF GUY SCHOONMAKER FOR APPROVAL OF A VARIANCE DECISION: The application for the requested variance is granted subject to the conditions listed. INTRODUCTION Guy Schoonmaker, 727- 6th Avenue South, Edmonds, Washington, 980.20, and herein- after referred to as Applicant, has requested approval of a variance from the required 15 foot setback for a deck that is located at 727 - 6th Avenue South, Edmonds, Washington, and is more particularly described as set forth in Exhibit #2 which is attached hereto. More specifically the requested variance is to allow a required rear yard setback of 4 feet instead of the mandatory 15 feet on the subject property. A hearing on the request was held before the Hearing Examiner of the City of Edmonds, Washington, on September 15, 1983. The following presented testimony at the public hearing: Duane Bowman Guy Schoonmaker Planning Department 727 - 6th Avenue South City of Edmonds Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 John Filipiak 6.25 - 6th Avenue South Edmonds, WA 98020 The following exhibits were presented at the public hearing: Exhibit 1 - Staff Report Exhibit 2 - Application and Declaration of the Application Exhibit 3 - Vicinity Map Exhibit 4 - Plot Plan Exhibit 5 - Pictures of the Applicant's After due consideration of the evidence presented by the Applicant; evidence elicited during the public hearing; and, as a result of the personal inspection of the subject property and the surrounding area by the Hearing Examiner, the following findings of fact and conclusions constitute the basis of the decision of the Hearing Examiner. 0 a- Findings and Decision or '►.rie Hearing Examiner of the City of Edmonds Page Two FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Applicant has requested approval of a variance to allow a rear yard setback of 4 feet instead of the required 15 foot setback in order to place a deck in the backyard on property located at 727 - 6th Avenue South, Edmonds, Washington. 2. The subject property is zoned RS-6. The property has a Comprehensive Plan designation of low density residential. 3. The subject property contains 7200 square feet. On the subject property is a small creek that meanders through the rear yard and flows down along the north property line. The location of the creek and the subject property can be seen on the Exhibit 4-attached hereto. 4. Because the creek is located on the subject property it has been difficult for the placement of the structures on the subject property. 5. The Applicant has partially constructed a deck of approximately 250 square feet. Because the deck does not have a roof it is not considered an assessory building. Were the deck considered an accessory building to the residence a rear yard setback of 5 feet would be allowed. However, in the current situation the required setback is 15 feet. 6. In order for a variance to be granted within the City of Edmonds the criteria as listed in Section 20.85.010 of the Edmonds Community Development Code must be met. The criteria are: a. Special circumstances must be shown to exist for the granting of a variance; b. The granting of a variance would not be a special privilege granted to the Applicant; c. The requested variance must be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Edmonds; d. The requeseted variance must be consistent and not conflict with the purposes and zoning ordinances of the City of Edmonds; e. The requested variance must not be significantly detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare nor be detrimental to the adjacent property. f. The requested variance must be the minimum necessary to develop the property in a reasonable manner. 7. Because of the location of the creek on the'subject property special circum- stances exist for the property that are not present in other properties. 8. The granting of the requested variance will not be the granting of a special privilege in that the Applicant must design the deck around the meandering creek which runs through the property. 9. The requested variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare nor to nearby properties. Findings and Decision Hearing Examiner of the City of Edmonds Page Three 10. The requested variance is the minimum necessary to reasonably utilize the subject property. 11. The Planning Department of the City of Edmonds recommended approval of the variance subject to no conditions. 12. The Applicant testified to be in support of the recommendation of the Plan- ning Department. 13. A witness (Filipiak) testified that he was a neighbor of the Applicant. He strongly recommended approval of the variance in order that the Applicant could put in the proposed deck. According to the witness the deck will help alleviate drainage problems and will create a more stable environment for the residence on the subject property and the surrounding properties. rnmrl iiclnNC 1. The application is for the approval of a variance from the required 15 foot setback at 727 - 6th Avenue South, Edmonds, Washington. More particularly the Applicant desires a setback of 4 feet for the purpose of constructing a deck. 2. A deck is not considered an accessory building to the residence on the subject property. it is not an accessory building because it does not have a roof. Thus, it is imperative that the setbacks be met unless a variance is acquired. 3. The proposed application conforms with the criteria as set forth in Section 20.85.010 of the Edmonds Community Development Code. 4. Special circumstances exist on the subject property necessitating the granting of a variance. 5. The special circumstances include the creek meandering through the property. 6. The granting of the variance will not be a special privilege granted to the Applicant. The Applicant most design the deck around the property involved. 7. The proposed variance is consisterrC with the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Edmonds and the zoning ordinancessof the City of Edmonds and in particular an R-8 zone. 8. The requested variance will not be significantly detrimental to the nearby properties or to the public health, safety or welfare. 9. The requested variance is the minimum necessary to property develop the subject property. 10. The Planning Department of the City of Edmonds recommended approval of the variance subject to no conditions. , �� x y"GS.L` '"'L -0S F ..,..__...............,. ,.�.i.. ..c... ..,._...r. ..._. _.tr.t......W». ., I ............. ........«..�,..a�..a. n.. e.,..,. ... ., ._... _..�. w. ........,_Lisle.n.u+.c..y _l.._. � _. Findings and Decision of the Hearing Examiner of the City of Edmonds Page Four 11. No adverse testimony was received in this matter. DECISION Based upon the findings and conclusions, the testimony submitted at the public hearing, and upon a sight view made by the Hearing Examiner, the requested variance of the Applicant to allow a rear yard setback of 4 feet for property located at 727 - 6th Avenue South, Edmonds, Washington, is granted. The variance is granted subject to the following condition: 1. The Applicant is to comply with all building codes for the City of Edmonds. Done and dated this 28th day of September, 1983, pursuant to the authority granted the Hearing Examiner of.the City of Edmonds. J S 14. DRISCOLL H ring Examiner NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL ,Written appeals alleging specific error of fact or other grounds for appeal may be filed with the Department of Community Development within fourteen days after the date of this decision pursuant to Section 20.85.010 of the City of Edmonds Develop- ment Code. In V ma ter any appeal must be received no.later than 5:00 p.m. on October 1983. 0 t:l EXHIBIT 4 )ropoSeA Vck r 1 o. nce eo qu,& r e A (A c q ''""�`uultn7ds^..3::�i�..m,eocc..;�.�.,,.rwilak:x.xa....ua.S.::...,..c.r..s,.:ua:..��3.L4:,aei�3.l..ivA,:,za.��...:�:.�::'w.cw.•,.w.�:,.,Gt�.:....,n.tii .,nu��•ar»u;.S RECEIVED IviAK 2 6 1987 ENGINE�R�NG City of Edmonds Gary McComas - Fire M. INTER -OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE Bobby, Mills - P.W. Dan Smith/Jerry Hauth - Engv/'�- Duane Bowman 3/26/87 TO FROM DATE SUBJECT V-14-87 VARIANCE TO ALLOW FOR PROPOSED ADDITION TO BE. SETBACK 11'. FROM STREAM INSTEAD OF CODE REQUIRED 15' AT 727-6TH AVENUE S. (RS-6) HEARING DATE: MAY 7, 1987 PLEASE RESPOND WITH YOUR COMMENTS NO LATER THAN APRIL 16, 1987. THANKS. 5/z /7c57 1. �,"i ji ii�ai II.JF.��Lk'`wLj.�'.Y�ix7S.�.S`.l�ti'Ate'oS.W�v�ali1':41d•�..C�wSiLYa�f�,.d3r':liiaf.iu.GiaNa3s.}wKa+au.+.i..s.w.f....�M•..ir.n....ir..a.aw::Y ... n,. .....�. � .. � , .._ .. . ..._ _ . .. h� jr i- Lt..l1: I V E D City of Edmonds Gary McComas - Fire M. INTER -OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE Bobby. Mills - P.W. Dan Smith/Jerry Hauth - Eng. Duane Bowman TO FROM CI IRAF=r.T V-14-87 VARIANCE TO ALLOW FOR PROPOSED ADDITION.TO BE. SETBACK.11'. FROM STREAM INSTEAD OF CODE REQUIRED 15' AT 727-6TH AVENUE S. (RS-6) HEARING DATE: MAY 7, 1987 PLEASE RESPOND WITH YOUR COMMENTS NO LATER THAN APRIL 16, 1987. THANKS. v -_,UPk T�20V- Gig PS ` I VED CITY of EDMIOo IDS '/-??,�,�, %`�O 9g Cityof Edmonds AUB1/C .�Y -ohrs Gary McComas - Fire INTER -OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE Bobby. Mills - P.W. 'Dan Smith/Jerry Hauth - Eng. Duane Bowman 3/26/87 TO FROM DATE SUBJECT V-14-87 VARIANCE TO ALLOW FOR PROPOSED ADDITION TO BE. SETBACK.11', FROM STREAM INSTEAD OF CODE REQUIRED 15' AT 727-6TH AVENUE S. (RS-6) HEARING DATE: MAY 7, 1987 PLEASE RESPOND WITH YOUR COMMENTS NO LATER THAN APRIL 16, 1987. THANKS. . u•J.dL'Yi��'" ^.a��..=Nlr±���R1 i6Vi� Mfl %)-Y1 �1 - CMS-Uv- Co _eve-S_ ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS LIST On my oath, I certify that the names and addresses provided represent all properties located within 80 feet of the subject property. Signature of Applicant or Applicant's Representative 7 Subscribed and sworn,- t /before m ` thi�s� / /„ a of " - 1922 /, NortarY—Public in and for the State o�Washington Residing at", t"f ZG ,C) 0 Guy Schoonmaker 727-6th Avenue S. Edmonds, WA 98020 The Hovi.e's/Resident 706-6th Ave. S. Edmonds, WA 98020 The Reed's/Resident 720-6th Ave. S. Edmonds, WA 98020 The Terek's/Resident 726-6th Ave. S. Edmonds, WA 98020 The Homey's/Resident 728-6th Ave. S. Edmonds, WA 98020 The Petersen's/Resident 707-6th Ave. S Edmonds, WA 98020 The Behymer's/Resident 723-6th Ave. S. Edmonds, WA 98020 The Gottschalk's /Resident 729-6th Ave. S. Edmonds, WA 98020 The Filipiak's/Resident 625-6th Ave. S. Edmonds, WA 98020 C The Coulter's/Resident 629-6th Ave. S. Edmonds, WA 98020 The Vi.neall's/Resident 627 Hemlock Way Edmonds, WA 98020 The Dunhigan's/Resident 635 Hemlock Way Edmonds, WA 98020 The Jarsma's/Resident 641 Hemlock Way Edmonds, WA 98020 Terek & Winskie/Resident 726-6th Ave. S. Edmonds, WA 98020 The Grand's 703-6th Ave. S. Edmonds, WA 98020 The Behymer's RR 4 44 Schram Drive Hoquiam, WA 98550 The Callahan's 729-6th Ave. S. Edmonds, WA 98020 =1� THEqfAmW6 f WILL HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING N %(! 19 , ON THE FOLLOWING APPLICATION: MAY-7— FILE NO. Y!V�— PROPERTY ADDRESS AND LOCATION717 AVS eS—s lerg< Or ZONE DISTRICT vq% %w co THE HEARING WILL BEGIN AT 7L • e M., IN THE PLAZA MEETING ROOM, LIBRARY BUILDING, 850 MAIN STREET, EDMONDS, WASHINGTON. IF YOU WISH TO COMMENT ON THIS PROPOSAL, YOU MAY COME TO THE HEARING AND SPEAK. YOU MAY ALSO WRITE A LETTER STATING YOUR VIEWS WHICH WILL BE CONSIDERED AT THE HEARING. PLEASE ADDRESS THE LETTER TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND INCLUDE THE ABOVE FILE NUMBER. E AGENDA IS T COMPLETED, OR IF THE ITEM IS INFONTINUED TO RMATION S NEEDED,THER DATE OFING BECAUSE THE CONTINUED HEARING O FURTHER HEAR G WILL BE ANNOUNCED ONLY AT THE MEETING. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION MAY BE OBTAINED AT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, 250 FIFTH AVENUE NORTH, EDMONDS (PHONE 771-3202, EXTENSION 252). THE REMOVAL, MUTILATION, DESTRUCTION, OR WAOEM CONCEALMENT OF THIS NOTICE BEFORE THE DATE K N I OF THE HEARING IS A MISDEMEANOR PUNISHABLE BY FINE AND IMPRISONMENT. A%f 7 19S7 THIS NOTICE MAY BE REMOVED AFTER r ct N\a,(-Q-Qc L� -- 2J.-� STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss. COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH ) Ray Johnson and says: FILE NO. V-14-87 APPLICANT Guy Schoonmaker AFFIDAVIT OF POSTER being first duly sworn, on oath, deposes That on the 24th day of April 1987 the attached Notice of Public Hearing was posted as prescribed by Ordinance, and in any event, in the Frances Anderson Center and Civic Center, and where applicable on or near the subject property. Signed _ Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of 19_�. Notary Pub I I C in anQ Tor LfleZ) UC1 .0 V 1 Washington. Residing at — IVy COMMISSION EXPIRES 6.16-89. I FILE NO. V-14-87 APPLICANT Guy Schoonmaker AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss. COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH ) Susan Painter being first duly sworn, on oath deposes and says: That on the 24th day of April ,19 87 , the attached Notice of Public Hearing was mailed as required to adjacent property owners, the names of which were provided by the applicant. Signed LL,C[ 41L Subscribed and sworn to before me this 6p day of 19�• Notary Public in and for the StateofWashington. Residing at� m® �L AM THIS PACKET SENT -TO HEARING EXAMINER ON MAY 1, 1987 / EXHIBIT LIST V-14-87 EXHIBIT 1 - STAFF REPORT'`` EXHIBIT 2 - APPLICATION/DECLARATIONS i� EXHIBIT 3 - HEARING EXAMINER DECISION V-11-83 EXHIBIT 4 - SITE PLAN` 1. EXHIBIT 5 - VICINITY MAP f: t;. i F.; r. f. i EXHIBIT 1 STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER FILE: V-14-87 HEARING DATE: May 7, 1987 I. REQUESTED ACTION: Variance to reduce the required 15' setback from a creek to 11' for a proposed addition to the residence at 727 6th Ave. S., Edmonds. II. APPLICANT/OWNER: Guy Schoonmaker 727 6th Ave. S. Edmonds, WA 98020 III. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: See Exhibit 2 IV. STAFF FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: A. Description of the Subject Property and Surrounding Area The subject property contains approximately 7,200 square feet. There is an existing single family dwelling located on the subject property. Shellabarger creek meanders through the rear yard, starting at the southeast corner of the lot, flowing northrward and then west along the north property line. (See Exhibit 3). In 1983, the applicant was granted a variance to allow a detached deck within 4' of the rear lot line, per file #V-11-83. The applicant is seeking a variance to allow an addition onto the southeast corner of the existing house. Code requires a minimum 15' setback from the creek. The addition, at its closest point, is 11'. Surrounding development is entirely single family residential. B. Official Street Map Proposed R/W Existing R/W West - 6th Ave. S. 60' 60' C. Conformance to Chapter 20.85.010 1. Special Circumstances Staff Report Page 2 V-14-87 While it is true that Shellabarger Creek flows through the subject property, the stream channel was built in its present configuration by the applicant. 2. Special Privilege The proposed variance does hot appear to represent a grant of special privilege. 3. Comprehensive Plan The Comprehensive Policy Plan map designates the subject property as Low Density Residential. As conditioned, the proposed variance does not appear to conflict with the purposes of the Comprehensive Plan. 4. Zoning Ordinance The subject property, as well as the surrounding properties, is zoned RS-6. The proposed variance does not appear to conflict with the purposes of the zoning ordinance or the RS-6 zone district. 5. Not Detrimental As conditioned, the proposed variance does not appear to pose any significant impact to the public or to any near by private property or improvement. 6. Minimum Variance As conditioned, the requested variance does appear to represent a minimum variance request. V. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The purpose for requiring a fifteen foot setback for building foundations is twofold. First, it acts as a way to preserve stream banks and prevent erosion. Second, it gives a measure of limited protection from flooding. Should the Hearing Examiner decide to grant the variance request, Staff recommends that the following conditions be attached: 1. The Applicant submit a hold harmless agreement to the City, releasing the City from any claims for damages should a flood occur on the property. Such agreement to be approved as to form by the City Attorney. u „ •,..,:• ...�.... . .ake. �:2.a�ik4..f.ovuusmruutn,i;:wi.�u:M'.:�;4'7c±"471Y.:?.L .:ii..an:..+ »ui"aiila.;d.El+.an.E4,isSxaaLa.� sa.r;i:i.:.s:r;una:.,.,.,...,..,,1a.�3:,:%s:.t"..� t....> - tn..;�.��4,�"�.1.a...(o-�aM+�uU�`s°w`"'u'„e„ a _ w'4 wi Staff Report Page 3 V-14-87 2. The Applicant submit an erosion control plan for review and approval by the City Engineer with building permit application. PLEASE PRINT YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS BELOW IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM AND/OR WISH TO RECEIVE A COPY OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S FINDINGS OF FACT V-14-87 GUY SCHOONMAKER Variance to reduce the required 15' setback from a creek to 11' for a proposed residential addition at 727 6th Avenue S. NAME ADDRESS CITY OF EDMONDS 250 5th AVE. N. • EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 98020 • (206) 771.3202 HEARING EXAMINER FINDINGS AND DECISIONS OF THE HEARING EXAMINER OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF GUY SCHOONMAKER FOR APPROVAL OF A VARIANCE DECISION: The variance for a reduction of -the 15' foot setback from a creek at 727 - 6th Avenue South, Edmonds, Washington, is granted subject -to condi- tions listed. INTRODUCTION REC4jVLW0) JUN 1198'7 PNI� LARRY S. S. NA T pr• MAYOR FILE: V-14-87 Guy Schoonmaker, 727 - 6th Avenue South, Edmonds, Washington, 98020, (hereinafter referred -to as Applicant) has requested approval of a variance to reduce the required 15 foot setback from Shelbarger Creek (hereinafter referred to as Creek) to 11 feet in order to construct a proposed addition to a residence at 727 - 6th Avenue South, Edmonds, Washington. A hearing on the request was held before -the Hearing Examiner of the City of Edmonds on May 7, 1987. At -the hearing -the following presented testimony and evidence: Duane Bowman Planning Department City of Edmonds Edmonds, WA 98020 Guy Schoonmaker 727 - 6th Ave S Edmonds, WA 98020 At the hearing the following exhibits were submitted and were ad- mitted as part of the official record of these proceedings: Exhibit 1 - Staff Report Exhibit 2 - Application/Declarations Exhibit 3 - Hearing Examiner Decision V-11-83 Exhibit 4 - Site Plan Exhibit 5 - Vicinity Map ��.. .., .�J �.t,�: ,..n.,.w.. ,:._..,e.,.�i�ta.....,,...aie;aW�._..... ... ....._ _..... r._..,...,�...,,.._.�.�.k............y,«.,_..`....._........f_..:•..,...�a:v3.. �..i..:,ns ... ....,_.. .,...,,....,__'_ Findings and Decision of the Hearing Examiner of the City of Edmonds - V-14-87 Page Two After due consideration of the evidence presented by the Applicant; evidence elicited during the public hearing; and, as a result of the personal inspection of 'the subject property and the surrounding area by the Hearing Exaainer, the following findings of fact and conclusions constitute the basis of the decision of the Hearing Examiner. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Applicant has requested a variance to reduce the required 15 foot setback from the Creek at 727 - 6th Avenue S, Edmonds, Washington. The requested variance is for a reduction of the 15 foot setback to an 11 foot setback. (Staff Report) 2. The subject property is zoned RS-6. The subject property has approximately 7,200 square feet of land. On the property is a single family dwelling. (Staff Report) 3. I't is the intent of the Applicant to add an addition to the rear portion of the single family dwelling existing on the property. The addition would be located at the southeast cor- ner of -the existing house. (Staff Report) 4. The Edmonds Community Development Code Section 15.15.020B6 requires that all building foundations and footings shall be no closer than 15 feet to a stream bank and shall be sited to create minimum disruption 'to the drainage system. In constructing 'the proposed addition to the single family resi- dence on site, the Applicant will be within.11 feet of the Creek which meanders through the site. As a result, •the Applicant is seeking a variance from the cited section of the ECDC. (Staff Report - Bowman testimony) 5. In order for a variance to be granted the criteria as set forth in ECDC 20.85.010 must be satisfied. (Administrative Findings) 6. The Creek has been re -channelled by the Applicant. It has been re -channelled and riprap has been placed at the mean- dering sections of the Creek to prevent any erosion or drainage problems. As a result of the re -channelling the Applicant is limited in making additions to the single family residence. (Bowman testimoney - Applicant testimony) 7. Without a variance the Applicant is limited to adding on to the house by adding an additional story. This, however, ■ Findings and Decision'of the Hearing Examiner of the City of Edmonds V-14-87 Page Three will impact other views in the area and will be detrimental to other properties. As a result, the Applicant desires to make the addition by extending into the 15 foot setback. (Applicant testimony) 8. The Planning Department of the City of Edmonds submitted that the 15 foot setback preserves stream banks and prevents ero- sion. Further, it gives limited protection from flooding. However,..there has been no erosion of the stream bank at the closest point to the single family residence on site and there has.been no flooding in this area. (Bowman testimony - Applicant testimony) 9. The City Planning Department submitted that if a variance is granted the following conditions should be made part of the variance: A. The Applicant submit a Hold Harmless Agreement to the City, releasing the City from any claims for damage should a flood occur on the property, such agreement to be approved as to form by the City Attorney. B. The Applicant submit an erosion control plan for re- view and approval by the City Engineer with building. permit application. (Staff Report) 10. The comprehensive plan of the City of Edmonds designates the subject property as low -density residential. The City has determined that the requested variance would not be in conflict with the purposes of the comprehensive plan. (Bowman testimony) 11. The City has determined that the requested variance would not be in conflict with the purposes of the zoning ordinance for the R-6 zone district. (Bowman -testimony) 12. No adverse testimony was received in this matter. CONCLUSIONS 1. The application is for the approval of a variance to allow an addition to a residence at 727 - 6-th Avenue S, Edmonds, Washington, to encroach within the required 15 foot setback from the Creek. The requested variance is to allow a reduced setback of 11 feet. I �� ','t.�'� ..,,...uaw..... )... r.... u.n ..r�.�._.. .i...t,�.r.s +..t xi .... n..-. .d...r. ...sar,.,v.x.,. a..:.La.vu.... ....�..u..�..F. w,.s.LSue.w...i�.i •.,.i. Ie..u«..L.'a...,. „_ii ... n.aaY ...+,. �..__.....xr.�...wa.axu�,,.w�..r......a.c....uur.uW.�'�...�.�+u .ar.s ..t �.__� Findings and Deciof the Hearing Examiner o. the City of Edmonds V-14-87 Page Four 2. With conditions, the requested variance conforms to criteria of ECDC 20.85.010. 3. Special circumstances exist for the granting of the variance. Because of the location of -the single family residence in rela- tion to the Creek the Applicant, without the variance, is limited in the type of addition he can make to the single family residence. The only addition would be -to add another story to the house. This, however, will impact other views in the area. As a result of the special circumstances the variance is warranted. 4. The granting of the variance is not the granting of a special privilege to the Applicant. ` 5. The requested variance is consistent with the low -density residential designation as set forth in the comprehensive plan of the City of Edmonds. It is consistent in that it provides for high quality residential development which will harmonize with the existing surroundings and protect the neighborhood from incompatible additions to an existing building. 6. The requested variance is consistent with the purposes of the RS zone district, in particular the RS-6 zone designation. It is consistent because it regulates areas primarily for family living in a single family dwelling and it provides for an addition which will be compatible with the single family dwelling on site. 7. The requested variance will not be detrimental to other pro- perties in the area. 8. The requested variance does appear -to be the minimum variance request. 9. The Planning Department of the City of Edmonds has recommended approval of the variance subject to the conditions that are set forth in finding number 9. nVrTCTnM Based upon the preceding findings of facts and conclusions, -the testimony and evidence submitted at the public hearing, and upon the impressions of the Hearing Examiner at a site view, it is here- by ordered that the Applicant is granted a variance for a reduction of -the 15 foot setback from Shelbarger Creek to an 11 foot setback for property located at 727 - 6th Avenue S, Edmonds, Washington. This variance is granted subject to the following conditions: q y. 4..- ,,...... ........ ....�.. , ......w ..... t,... a..,e. e.. we ..s. .. n.....+w.a.v.� I Findings and Deci!zl.n of the Hearing Examiner of the City of Edmonds V-14-87 Page Five 1. The Applicant is to submit a.Hold Harmless Agreement to the City releasing the City from any claims for damages should a flood occur on the property. This agreement is to be ap- proved as to form by the City Attorney. Any provisions or terms of this agreement are to be negotiated between the City and the Applicant. 2. The Applicant shall submit an erosion control plan for review and approval by the City Engineer with submittal of the building permit application. No building permit application is to be granted until -the City Engineer has approved the erosion control plan. 3. The Applicant may be limited in the type of foundation allowed for the addition. The Department of Engineering of the City of Edmonds must approve any foundation that is to be located within the area in which the variance is granted. rnMMFNTS 1. From the testimony and evidence submitted it appears that the area proposed for the addition to the Applicant's residence is stable and can support -the proposed addition. From the testimony submitted at the public hearing by the Applicant, it appears that no erosion or flooding occurs from Shelbarger Creek at the meander of the stream that is near the area in which the variance is requested. However, the Applicant is required to enter into a Hold Harmless Agreement. 2. The terms of the Hold Harmless Agreement shall be negotiated. between the Applicant and the City. This agreement is a matter of negotiation between the parties. DONE AND DATED this 2 6, day of May, 1987, pursuant to the authority granted the Hearing Examiner.,of the City of Edmonds. J ES M. DRISCOLL ;'Hearing Examiner Notice of Right to Appeal Written appeals alleging specific error of fact or other grounds for appeal may be filed with -the Department of City Development within fourteen (14) days after the date of this decision Rursuant to Secion 20.85.010 of the City of Edmonds Development Code. GG In this matter any appeal must be received no later than 5:00 pm on 0 �8�3g6 n ( CITY CLERK CIVIC CENTER EDMONDS. WA 98020 for rocord 0 0.`�'7'fT F WSS/ . 0 6/ 0 8/ 8 7 `"ot.oRtish County Auditor INDEMNIFICATION AGREEMENT -'COVENANT TOUCHING AND CONCERNING THE LAND WHEREAS, Guy and Patty Schoonmaker (hereinafter "Owners") have applied to the City of Edmonds, Washington, (hereinafter "City") for a variance in order to commence certain construction within the fifteen foot setback from Shelbarger Creek (hereinafter "Creek") to eleven feet in order to construct a proposed addition to a residence at 727 Sixth Avenue South, Edmonds, Washington; WHEREAS, the City has indicated its willingness to grant such variance, one of the factors considered in said grant of variance being the willingness of the applicants and owners to provide indemnification, hold harmless and release to the City for any damage arising from or to the proposed residential construction and addition; and WHEREAS, the applicants and owner of the herein described property freely and voluntarily wish to provide such an indemnification agreement in consideration of the grant of such a variance, now, therefore THE UNDERSIGNED Owners, Guy and Patty Schoonmaker, in consideration of the grant of the variance by the City of Edmonds, in File No. V-14-87, do hereby covenant and promise as follows: 1. Covenant: Touching and Concerning the Land: This agreement is a covenant which touches and concerns certain residential property located at 727 Sixth Avenue South, Edmonds, Washington, (hereinafter "premises") and legally described as: (INSERT LEGAL DESCRIPTION] Sec ed , C\ ai coy- fJ 'AL-/ A)W /y -T- H N ,.. 6 0+* T }A 5 This covenant shall run with the land and bind the Owners, their successors, heirs, transferees and assigns. 2. Hold Harmless Agreement: The Owners. promise to hold harmless and indemnify the City of Edmonds, it.s employees, agents and assigns for any and all claims, loss or liability. of any kind or nature whatsoever associated with or arising from or out of the construction of the proposed a residential addition at 2 O 7© PAGE 2 3 9 7 .g the premises, PROVIDED, however, that this promise to indemnify and hold harmless shall be subject to the following express limitations: 2.1 This promise to indemnify and hold harmless shall not be interpreted as extending to or waiving any right or defense relating to the existing residence as the same existed on the date this covenant to indemnify and hold harmless was executed, nor 2.2 Shall this promise to indemnify and hold harmless extend to any act caused by the sole negligence of the City. 3. Recordation. This covenant shall be•recorded with the Snohomish County Auditor at the sole expense of the Owners. 4. Amendment Prohibited. This covenant shall not be amended without the express written consent of the Owners of said premises and the City of Edmonds, by and through its City Council. Now, therefore, this covenant is executed this 0-24 day of 1987. O S- Guy'Shoonmaker Patty/ Schoonmaker STATE OF WASHINGTON) ) ss. COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH) On this day personally appeared before me, the undersigned Notary Public, Guy Schoonmaker and Patty Schoonmaker, husband and wife, to me known to be the individuals described in and who executed the within and foregoing document and acknowledge to me that they signed the same as their free and voluntary ac.t and deed for the uses and purposes therein mentioned. GAVEN nder my hand and of ,, 1987. officia seal thi _Z(5 day G� NOTARY PUBL-E in and Ezyr the State of Wash' ton, residing at � -2- Commission 'Expires: voL.20'70PAGE2398 0 Accepted by: CITY OF E MONDS E"r (Igh'en, Mayor Attest: itity 'Clerk, Jacqueline Parrett Approved as to form: Office of the City Attorney BY c6nir"T� a(z— 7071.0-1030F 0 -3- voL. 2070?A6E2399 C �.. ..�✓..rw.....�.�w.�a J..�...a. �. ,.��.._....._.. ._...... _.._._..._..i .,., ..a ..... ... ... ........ ..a..x..�...,. ......, ,....a .. .. w l.u.. �,. ....—....._ ... .e.....0 ....+,,...., ... _ A it^�Ev .a APPLICANT CITY & ZIP EXHIBIT CITY OF EDMONDS HEARING EXAMINER APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE Mark '�-iimmel.man Seattle Wa 98103 Z FILET v DATE /(} FEE_Z6 % RE CT k 53 APO'S Lz _ HEARING DATE: 7 v ADDRESS 1816 N. 54th PHONE 632-5696 INDICATE TYPE OR'DEGREE OF INTEREST IN PROPERTY owner LOCATION OR ADDRESS OF PROPERTY corner 8t.!i and Maple LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY lot 21&22 and the east half of lot 23 Block 89 Plat City of Edmonds Vol. 2 pg 38& 39 VARIANCE REQUESTED: Build a driveway bridge from 8th ave to proposed house i ine set back line. /c < FOR OFFICE USE ONLY: USE ZONE: ZONING ORDINANCE REQUIREMENT: ZO GyT✓LT�v�'i"BP��L Release/Hold Harmless Agreement The undersigned applicant, his heirs and assigns, in consideration for. the City processing the application agrees to release, indemnify, defend and hold the City of Edmonds harmless from any and all damages and/or claims for damages, including reasonable attorneys' fees, arising from any action or inaction is based in whole or in part upon .false, misleading or incomplete information furnished by the applicant, his agents or employees. Permission to Enter Subject Property The undersigned applicant grants his, her or its permission for public officials and the staff of the City of Edmonds to enter the subject property for the purpose of inspection and posting attend pnt to this application. .. /� Signature of Applicant, Owner or Representative n Variance Criteria Mark Himmelm.an (8th and Maple) The slope of the existing land drops at an average of more than ten foot, in the twenty foot set back from the front property line. This makes a normal driveway impossible, There is a stream on the south side of the lot-, making more access problems. Excess slope exists because of city of- Edmonds bringing in fill to construct roads. The needed variance is for a bridge in the 20foot building set back area, The bridge is for access to the proposed house from 8th Ave, The home next door is built with the same slope problem, with driveway and garage going to the property line, They built a retaining wall and bad!kfilled to the home, The Comprehensive Plan is low Density Residental, This variance will preserve light, privacy, and views, It will create no safety or congestion problems, being on a little used side street. The Zoning Ordinance is RS-6. This is for single family homes to preserve the existing character of the city. This will be a quality home and blend in with the existing homes. This type of bridge is already used over Edmonds in tie same way. The driveway bridge will be the safest and least impact on the property and stream, by not needing retaining walls , major dirt work or fill,, The home will be built on the flat part of the lot, The slope is now stable after years of natural compaction, and will be left alone to be landscaped. 0 x. :Rd+...;:S:l.;'.;.'_.,...,,....�.�..........,,......._.....s.r..�...,....`._......�.....�.3u..,......�.w,...�._._.... ._._..._........x..._�_...>..._...«............,...,.....«c...,,...::Diu.......,....__.....��...,.�.�..................u........,,..w„�.�u:'..wuut�:�w'4 i.:'!.. �"� Mr..k:�:: ri4 s. Page 2 There will be no visual im. pact as the bridge will be built below street level, The driveway is for single car parking, in a garage, and entry to the home. This is the minimum necessary to provide parking and a access, as the oth.er properties in the area .nave. 4W 4..�� ...tea._. �.•.. tu".�..._..u.v_�._... .e.. ,. ... .._... _....-.t__.1.�.�.a.em.a6L1+.Lr.'�k:h4+�+'wd..f.id i2 Y..:ti1.:.. aw:Lusau:ul— ��+, �{ DECLARATIONS OF APPLICANT Please answer all questions 1. What are the physical characteristics, (i.e. topography, shape of lot, etc.) which create a hardship for you.in regard to development of your property? A steep slope foona t'ie road to the building site makes a normal driveway impossible. Also a stream has to be built around• 2. How does your property differ from other property in the same vicinity? More of a drop from the road to the building site. 3. Will this variance be detrimental to the public or damaging to other property or improvements in the vicinity? no 4. What hardships will result to you if the variance is not granted? Will these hardships have been caused by your own action? With out this variance there would be a home with excess steps, and distance to the front entry. T:Zere would also be in building a driveway rnuc'i damage to and change in the existing lot and stream. 5. Can you make reasonable use of your property without the variance? no 0 1 .. u.. w.. .. ...ax ., ,. •... ..r.i �............. ...�.. ... ,.,.._ ,. ... .._......_.... ..._ c... ._........v.—_....-........_..u..�f....,,W.nrx.,...-..wGKa.wad.+ui`vl?htlLl3 `:21 J.v.a•t: • vY d � -EXHIBIT 4� ti � I � Y 1 _ _ • I d p AVE uTW aom O ' -i 3 0 o_r SL�a " " Soles, i wn—i �aV utX w V 509 5oB o S Arc %nsr, � z sov 51q s/s Si3 Rp .AVAi Tw( MP(I sis / 10 52s su sie s soy .� 52S 524 329 520 "I, vo 7 528 53/ 524 T:•f57 SoE 630 T�( �� S24 Tff - / s32 524 su 531 534 roustAW ( 535 Do" 555 sS4 a 533 Sae 's' �*t S1d 533 546 > 536 3 s45 543 D s,j 535 54G y r S,s r Q D 'a w s9a -t . 1 547 Sso —rn 54o r skis o g Z nq570 C CeM00 > Ti W m aiSwe-Y STS Z T� 67H ;50 GTH AvE S. 604 � 6o9 ,�, — —609 6°4 w P-4 • g 6/0 LIe 6// y aN_D C G(O 6/0 S11 O 6!5 G18 Ll1 L/6 613 6/4 417 SEA- cuff 11No'ce 62i (22 - °„ `„ o G21 624 G25 624 625 6t0 _ 426 _ o L3/ 629 628 6271`^ « �/ G32 G70 GY, 434 DURBIN 633 ;zo Ol 07 639 L73 632 637 Goo Gas _� sqJ Goo G39 640 401 692 64s 64G SNO-ISE 644 ' ' SZ4 648 64s G46 G4S 655 a 1sRA1tY �Rru 6So T4 652 G55 65i< � 650 65S 660 ti N o 6S7 65Y 467 651 652 7 TH 7T" AVE S 701 o A y 7oZ w 701 N p b 703 3 704 [i 711 7!0 ` P, 7of. b W 7f0 3' 706 — w 7/8 � D 700 ANofRSON D 712 7/4 ` f -r15 710 r °; 7167 7Zo cENrEA Z Q717 717 712 m 721 724 -4 O 711 D 7Z3 720 Z 7o _ m 7 �^ 2 729 712 ;7 G C 721 714 730 72, -4 73l 71l0 72, �y 736 731 716 739 . 739 -- j � 718 777 744 741 744 720 I 719 741 748 75J 722 7s2 EE 7Zl 75Z Sol dro gf1 gl6 W7 gy m g3o O 834 DD 837 C -i g41 g41 a, ok o Aj Z4 �3 i8 �pw oJo ti -lh �'Qh A L YqV �; ` vi8 °3 � 409 V 921 419 :o Oq ° �k�� So q/G S o�' r% 17T 4 AVE N. N � ft r r . N c< 6" 616 621 620 G23 m o Z 624 625 o a 62 640 e 445-- 651 .� 65'8 657 AVC N. � . J � O � kiox j .r � t• Lh tn • �u 1 C/ e� UN N 76 z T. =m m J •I � a i o -4 0 D v S k912 Cpr 1 r_ M RECEIVED -JUN 1 1"_1986 City Of Edmonds., OF EDN►OND S ,'Gary Mi 11 s-P_W. INTER -OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE . Gary McComas Fi Jerry Hauth/Dan Smith- Engineering Duane Bowman 6/10/86 TO FROM DATE SUBJECT V-15-86 VARIANCE TO REDUCE 20' REQUIRED STREET SETBACK TO 3' FOR CONSTRUCTION OF DRIVEWAY BRIDGE TO`PROP.OSED:RESIDENCE AT N.W. CORNER OF 8TH AND"MAPLE (_RS-6) HEARING DATE: JULY 3, 1986. PLEASE RESPOND WITH YOUR COMMENTS NO.LATE.R THAN JUNE 19, 1986. THANKS. k M City of Edmonds RIC ET' 'E JUN 171986 :INTEIRR-OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE Bobby Mflls7 P.W.'. ;,r al; CITY OF EDMO Gary- McComas Fire Marshal Duane Bowman June ITS 1986 Jerry Hauth/Dan Smith. Engineering DATE TO FROM SUBJECT V-15-86 VARI.ANCE TO -CONSTRUCT CANOPY OVER AN EXISTING.'GASOLINE PUMP ISLAND THAT 1S. LOCATED WITHIN 'THE 'BUILDING SETBACK AT 21'920 HIGHWAY '99 (.CG) HEARING DATE: JULY 3, 1986 PLEASE RESPOND-WI.TH YOUR COMMENTS NO LATER. THAN -JUNE*"20," -1986. THANKS. pep City'of Edmonds Bobby Mills-P.W. C - INTER-OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE Gary McComas - Fi e Marsha! ,/ferry Hauth/Dan Smith- Engineering Duane Bowman TO FROM DATE V-15-86 VARIANCE TO REDUCE 20' REQUIRED -STREET SETBACK TO 3' FOR CONSTRUCTION OF DRIVEWAY BRIDGE TO PROP.OSED:RESIDENCE AT N.W. CORNER OF 8TH.AND MAPLE (RS-6) HEARING DATE: JULY 3, 1986. PLEASE RESPOND WITH YOUR COMMENTS NO.LATER THAN JUNE 19, 1986. THANKS. IADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER LIST PLEASE LIST ALL STREET ADDRESSES OF RESIDENTS OF PROPERTY WITHIN 80 FEET OF THE PROPERTY LINES OF THE SITE. ALSO LIST NAMES AND MAILING ADDRESSES OF OWNERS OF THESE SAME PROPERTIES. (THIS INFORMATION MAY BE OBTAINED FROM THE COUNTY ASSESSOR IS OFFICE IF A BANK IS LISTED AS OWNER, PLEASE INCLUDE LOAN NUMBER NEXT TO INDIVIDUAL I S NAME.) 1.. Allen C . C Lark 806 D ayt:on Ed 2 Dirk F. D equitettes 201-8th A ve S Ed. 3. James A Brennan 221-9-Lh A ve S. Ed. 4. Warren N. Platt 808 Maple,, Ed. 5. Forest and Dorothy Cummings owners 07Xx Lots 15. 16, 17. 18. 19. 20, mailing address 671.1. Dayton Ave North Seattle Wa. (981.03) Block 90 6. Seafi.rst Mortgage Corp. Arnold A. Joyce 1118447 owdyrs t K77 Maple 4th & Blanchard Bldg, an the ere Seattle Wa 98121 7. Seattle Mortgage Co Arnold A Joyce 0066191 owners and landlords 744 Dayton 229 Queen Anne N. Seattle Wa 98109 8. Bankers Life Company Joseph W. Wermus 1.494640 owner 752 Dayton 711 High St. Des Moines Ia 50307 Mark Himmelman Resident 1816 N. 54th 744'Dayton Seattle, WA 98103 Edmonds, WA 98020 Allen C. Clark Bankers Life Company 806 Dayton Joseph W. Wermus Edmonds, WA 98020 #1494640 711 High St. Des Moines, LA 50307 Dirk F. Dequilettes Joseph W. Wermus 201-8th Ave. S. 752 Dayton Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 James A. Brennan 221-8th Ave. S. Edmonds, WA 98020 Warren N. Platt 808 Maple Edmonds, WA 98020 Forest & Dorothy Cummings 6711 Dayton Ave. N. Seattle., WA 98103 Seafirst Mortgage Corp. Arnold A. Joyce #1118447 4th & Blanchard Bldg. Seattle, WA 98121 Arnold A. Joyce 777 Maple Edmonds, WA 98020 Seattle Mortgage Co. Arnold A. Joyce #0066191 229 Queen - .Anne N. Seattle, WA 98109 0 THE HEARING EXAMINER WILL HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING THURSDAY, JULY 3 19 86 , ON THE FOLLOWING APPLICATION: :FILE NO: V-15-86 VARIANCE TO REDUCE -THE REQUIRED 20 ' SETBACK TO 3 ' FOR DRIVEWAY BRIDGE FOR PROPOSED NEW RESIDENCE PROPERTY ADDRESS AND LOCATION UNDEVELOPED LOT ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF 8TH AVENUE S. AND MAPLE STREET ZONE DISTRICT RS-6 THE HEARING WILL BEGIN AT 7 :30 PM., IN THE PLAZA MEETING ROOM, LIBRARY BUILDING, 650 MAIN STREET, EDMONDS, WASHINGTON. IF YOU WISH TO COMMENT ON THIS PROPOSAL, YOU MAY COME TO THE HEARING AND SPEAK. YOU MAY ALSO WRITE A LETTER STATING YOUR VIEWS WHICH WILL BE CONSIDERED AT THE HEARING. PLEASE ADDRESS THE LETTER TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND INCLUDE THE ABOVE FILE NUMBER. IF THE ITEM IS CONTINUED TO ANOTHER HEARING BECAUSE THE AGENDA IS NOT COMPLETED, OR FURTHER INFORMATION IS NEEDED, THE DATE OF THE CONTINUED HEARING WILL BE ANNOUNCED ONLY AT THE MEETING. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION MAY BE OBTAINED AT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, 250 FIFTH AVENUE NORTH, EDMONDS (PHONE 771-3202, EXTENSION 252). THE REMOVAL, MUTILATION, DESTRUCTION, OR NOTICE BEFORE THE DATE WARNING! OF THEALMENT H HEARING S A IMISDEMEANOR PUNISHABLE BY FINE AND IMPRISONMENT. THIS NOTICE MAY BE REMOVED AFTER JURY 3, 19s6 r V v l/wXXYd s1;1 ! j 'i ti3 r FILE NO. V-15-86 APPLICANT Mark Himmelman AFFIDAVIT OF POSTER STATE OF WASEIINGTON ) ) ss. COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH ) Duane Bowman being first duly sworn, on oath, deposes and says: That on the 19th day of June 19 86 , the attached T Notice of Public Hearing was posted as prescribed by Ordinance, and in any event, in the Frances Anderson Center and Civic Center, and where applicable on or near the subject property. Signed Subscribed and sworn to before me this "5' sue day of �L r/ 19� Notary Public in and for the State oT Washington. Residing at c,rrn MY COMMISSION €, 9. 0 _ ._,<.�.,.__ —..: �..r �,G_.w._....a.ss.....�.i.iW..�..._ .W........,_._.._,..,.._._._.,.._.«...�...�.,.,..A...........,.�..�.__�....,.....�...,..s..._.........-...,_�,..._._L.�.._......,..,................&._...,,, -.W........,..,....a.._.s,..�:4'_.w,:6. ` r ■ AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ss. COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH ) Susan Painter FILE NO. V-15-86 APPLICANT Mark Himmelman being first duly. sworn, on oath deposes and says: That on the 19th day of June ,19 86 the attached Notice of Public Hearing was mailed as required to adjacent property owners, the names of which were provided by the applicant. Si gned� • Subscribed and sworn to before me this / / day of 19 ;i r« Notary Public in and for the State of Washington. Residing at MY COMMISSION EXPIRES 6.16-8 . 0 _. THIS PACKET SENT TO HEARING EXAMINER ON JUNE 27, 1986 EXHIBIT LIST V-15-86 EXHIBIT 1 - STAFF REPORT EXHIBIT 2 - APPLICATION/DECLARATIONS EXHIBIT 3 - PLOT PLAN EXHIBIT 4 - BUILDING ELEVATIONS EXHIBIT 5 - VICINITY MAP t' EXHIBIT 1 STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER FILE: V-15-86 HEARING DATE: July 3, 1986 I. REQUESTED ACTION: Variance to reduce the required 20' street setback to 3' to allow a driveway bridge for a proposed residence on the northwest corner of 8th Ave. S. and Maple Street, Edmonds. II. APPLICANT/OWNER: Mark Himmelman 1816 N. 54th Seattle, WA 98103 III. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: See Exhibit 2 IV. STAFF FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: A. Description of the Subject Property and Surrounding Area The subject property is located on the northwest corner of 8th Ave. S. and Maple Street. The property has 75' of frontage along Maple Street and 110' of frontage along 8th Ave. S. The main portion of the lot lies well below both the streets. A small stream flows westward through the southern third of the property. The Applicant is seeking to build a single family residence on the subject property. In order to access the garage in the intended residence, a bridge is proposed off of 8th Ave. S. Because the bridge structure is over 30" in height, a variance is needed to reduce the street setback from 20' to 3'. Surrounding development is all single family residential. B. Official Street Ma South - Maple Street East - 8th Ave. S. Proposed R/W 60' .M Existing R/W 60' .a C Staff Report V-15-86 C. Conformance to Chapter 20.85.010 ' Page 2 1. Special Circumstances Special circumstances do appear to exist in this particular case due to the irregular topography on the lot. 2. Special Privilege Due to the difficult topography of the subject lot, proposed variance does not appear to represent a grant of special privilege. 3. Comprehensive Plan The Comprehensive Policy Plan map designates the subject property as Low Density Residential. The proposed variance does not appear to conflict with the purposes of the Comprehensive Plan. 4. Zoning Ordinance The subject property, as well as the surrounding area , is zoned RS-6. The proposed variance does not appear to conflict with the purposes of the zoning ordinance or the RS-6 zone district. 5. Not Detrimental The proposed variance does not appear to pose any significant impact to the public nor to any nearby private property or improvement. 6. Minimum Variance The requested variance does appear to represent a minimum variance request to allow access to the proposed garage. V. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: It is the recommendation of the staff that V-13-86 be approved in that it appears to conform with the review criteria of Chapter 20.85.010 of the Community Development Code. ni } CITY OF E O M O N O S LARRY S. NAUGHTEN :46 f 250 5Ih AVE. N. EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 98020 (206) 771.3202 MAYOR COMMUNITY SERVICES PETER E. HAHN DIRECTOR DATE: July 7, 1986 TO: John Galt 927 Grand Everett, WA 98201 TRANSMITTING: SIGN-UP SHEETS FOR V-15-86 AND P-3-86 AS YOU REQUESTED: FOR YOUR INFORMATION: XXX AS WE DISCUSSED: FOR APPROVAL: FOR YOUR FILE: XXX REVIEW AND COMMENT COMMENT AND RETURN: MINUTES OF 14EETING: REMARKS: PLANNING DIVISION cc: Colleen Betteridge Susan Painter PUBLIC WORKS PLANNING 0 PARKS AND RECREATION ENGINEERING I PLEASE PRINT YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS BELOW IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM AND/OR WISH TO RECEIVE A COPY OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S FINDINGS OF FACT V-15-86 MARK HIMMELMAN Variance to reduce the required street setback from 20' to 3' for a driveway bridge for a proposed new residence on the undeveloped lot located on the northwest corner of 8th Ave. S. and Maple Street. NAME ADDRESS 44 s 4 0 a..�...� _...,...e:.a .. ..,._ ..... - .... _, y::,s5.:.ta...vi.,vr✓.u.:..:.+c..+t.4c;;e,.r.2ixkt�i:.:, ,. CITY OF EDMONDS LARRY S. NAUGHTEN MAYOR 250 5th AVE. N. • EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 98020 • (206) 771.3202 HEARING EXAMINER RECEIVED FINDINGS AND DECISION JUL 181986 OF THE HEARING EXAMINER OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS CIT_y OF EDMONDS IN THE MATTER OF THE ZONING FILE: V-15-86 CODE VARIANCE REQUEST OF MARK HIMMELMAN DECISION: Variance granted subject to conditions. INTRODUCTION Mark Himmelman (hereinafter referred to as "Himmelman") has filed a zoning code variance to relax the street setback from 20 feet to 3 feet for a driveway bridge associated with a proposed single-family residence on the northwest corner of the 8th Avenue South and Maple Street intersection in Edmonds. A public hearing was held by the City of Edmonds Hearing Examiner Pro Tem at 7:30 p.m. on Thursday, July 3, 1986. The following parties presented testimony and evidence during the hearing: Duane Bowman Mark Himmelman Planning Department 1816 North 54th City of Edmonds Seattle, WA 98103 Edmonds, WA 98020 Jim Brennan 221 - 8th Ave. So. Edmonds, WA 98020 The following exhibits were submitted at the hearing and admitted as part of the record: Exhibit 1 - Staff report 2 - Applications/Declarations " 3 - Plot Plan 4 - Building elevations 5 - Vicinity map After due consideration of the testimony and evidence presented by the parties during the public hearing, the provisions of the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) and a site inspection on July 3, 1986, by the Examiner Pro Tem, the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions are entered as the basis of the Examiner Pro Tem's decision. 0 i Findings and Decisic( of the Hearing Examiner of the City of Edmonds Re: V-15-86 Page 2 FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The subject property consists of lots 21, 22 and the east half of 23, Block 89, Plat of the City of Edmonds. The sub- ject property occupies the northwest quadrant of the 8th Avenue S/Maple Street intersection and is presently undevelol Himmelman desires to construct a single-family residence on the subject property and is seeking a street setback varianc, in order to construct an elevated driveway bridge to the residence. 2. The subject property is zoned RS-6; the required minimum street setback is 20 feet (ECDC 16.20.030). The proposed driveway bridge will come to within approximately three feet of the 8th Avenue South property line. A variance is therefore necessary if the bridge is to be constructed. 3. The subject property is part of what once was a ravine. Original site topography was substantially altered during the construction of 8th Avenue South and Maple Street. 8th Avenue South rkns north -south more or less at right angles to the original ravine. Fifteen or more feet of fill was placed on the site to cross the ravine. Maple Street runs east -west more or less parallel to the ravine. Some cut and fill is evident in its construction. The end result is that nearly 1H:lV slopes occupy the 20-foot street setback area adjacent to both 8th Avenue South and Maple Street. The building area (the area inside the requii setback lines) varies from 12 feet to 20 feet lower in elevz tion than the abutting streets. (Exhibit 3.) 4. A small stream crosses the south half of the site, flowing north-westerly from a catchbasin at the base of the road fills in the southeast quarter of the site. The stream continues on a westerly course through the rest of the bloc] 5. The dominant vegetation on the site is grass/brush. There are no major trees on site. 6. Himmelman desires to construct a two-story residence within the allowable building area in the northwest quarter of the site. The residence will not disturb the stream. No acces to Maple Street is planned in order to avoid crossing the stream. Because of the great elevation drop along 8th Aven South, the garage is proposed to be on the second floor which would be approximately two feet lower than street gra on 8th Avenue South. Access to the garage would be over th proposed driveway bridge for which the instant variance has been sought. (Exhibits 3 and 4.) 7. The subject property is bordered on the north by an unopened, undeveloped alley. A single-family residence lies north of the alley. Access to said residence's garag( is from Dayton Street; the residence fronts 8th Avenue Soul at grade. The residence is a daylight basement style with 0 0 i t� �.�i.%..ce.✓arao.a.:r�..��Z"..d;.:.a.,x�.»...L..,..e.......,.w�.«..k.aa�uMr.iY.uL.w..k.r::::x�uw.,,.,.u..'W'.,...:.._�.;.eW'.rbJ..'-�'+6:u�S;+vxXi�:.,n.u`&.¢��..a.:,:x,�.�....r�tt�awas.tw�i�.;iw.,.ae..vr,�i.'i«.:.u.._n.w'�_.4ta�.,....v:.�u..uaf:a..w:ti Findings and Decisifr, of the Hearing Examiner of the City of Edmonds Re: V-15-86 Page 3 the basement opening to the south. 8. The residence to the west of the subject property is also a daylight basement structure with its garage access off Maple Street. A retaining wall was utilized to hold fill for the driveway. 9. No other lot in the general vicinity exhibits the same combi- nation of terrain and stream location as does the subject property. 10. Maximum building height in the RS-6 zone is 25 feet (ECDC 16.20.030). Building height is measured from the average level of the "downward projections of the four corners of the smallest rectangle which will enclose all of the building, excluding a maximum of 30 inches of eaves." (ECDC 21.40.030.) 11. There was no opposition to the requested variance. Brennan asked that the bridge not be included in building height calculations. Bowman stated that City staff would concur in excluding the bridge from height calculations. 12. The proposed residence complies with ECDC height limitations without counting the bridge in the "average level" calculation. CONCLUSIONS 1. The Examiner Pro Tem has jurisdiction over V-15-86 by virtue of the ECDC. 2. No variance can be approved which does not meet all six of the criteria in ECDC 20.85.010. 3. Special circumstances clearly exist on the subject property in the form of the unique (and difficult to work with) topo- graphy of the site. No other lot in the area is as affected by topographic difficulties as is the subject property. Criterion "A" is met. 4. No special privilege is involved. All other residences in the area have garages. This site physically cannot have a garage unless either the requested variance is granted or massive filling is employed in site development. Criterion "B" is met. 5. Approval of the variance would be more in keeping with the policies of the Edmonds Comprehensive Plan than would massive filling on site. The Plan encourages minimization of grading and filling, minimum disruption of the natural topography of a site and retention of streams in a non culverted condition (ECDC 15.15.000(C)(1) and (2) and 15.15.010 M (1)). No filling alternatives to the bridge can fulfill those goals and objectives. Criterion "C" is met. Ll Findings and Decisio. of the Hearing Examiner of the City of Edmonds Re: V-15-86 Page 4 6. The proposed variance will facilitate use of the subject property for residential purposes consistent with the zoning code. Criterion "D" is met. 7. The requested bridge will be the least physically disruptive way to provide a garage for the proposed residence. If the bridge were to be considered as a part of the residence for building height calculation purposes, however, an adverse visual impact could result because the "average level" would be nearly 10 feet higher. The bridge is in reality a driveway and should not be counted in the building height "average level" calculation. The variance, if so conditioned, would meet Criterion "E." 8. The requested variance is the minimum relief necessary to afford a reasonable use of the property. Criterion "F" is met. 9. All six of the criteria have been met; the requested variance may be approved. 10. The Examiner Pro Tem intends, and has no knowledge or belief to the contrary, that the actions, limitations and/ or conditions imposed by the instant decision are only such as are lawful and within the authority of the Examiner Pro Tem to impose pursuant to the ECDC. T1WrTgTnM The Examiner Pro Tem hereby GRANTS the requested variance SUBJECT TO the following CONDITIONS: 1. The instant variance is limited solely to that requested, namely a reduction in street setback for an uncovered driveway bridge to the proposed residence on the subject property. No other variance is either expressed or implied. 2. The bridge structure shall not be included in calculating the "average level" for building height purposes pursuant to ECDC 21.40.030. Decision entered this 16th day of July, 1986, pursuant to the authority granted under Chapter 20.100 of the ECDC. R, HN E. GALT Hearing Examiner Pro Tem ..�.. _.�. _.._....' ....__._..___...._ �t_...1_._..�:L.._. ,_ t. i �. ' .�.___. ..r.(..:�...i1.TLYKfiS3LY iiY+.AL1_.. u:� na<'.�X'N•— Findings and Decisio., a the Hearing Examiner of the City of Edmonds ._ Re: V-15-86 Page 5 NOTICE You are hereby given notice that the above decision constitutes a final decision for the City subject to the right of appeal to the City Council. Any such appeal shall contain the information required by ECDC 20.105.020 and shall be filed with the Community Development Director no later than 5:00 p.m.,local time, on July 30, 1986. .fl ism J k .,;��. i F. 7.•r+'.�._...�:w.....e...a.s...sas��ci,.aat.;:, i ..�ns..:...,.zz.......a..«�ius a 0 MEMORANDUM April 15, 1986 TO: FINANCE FROM: SUSAN PAINTER - PLANNING DIVISION SUBJECT: REFUND FOR GUNN L. STRAUME FILE NO. V-9-86 On March 27, 1986, Gunn L. Straume submitted an application for a variance to allow for overground wiring'at his property located at 1025 9th Avenue North. Mr. Straume withdrew this application on April 7, 1986. A refund in the amount of $80.00 should be sent to him at 907 Hindley Lane, Edmonds, WA 98020. The original receipt was #4990. Thanks. /sp Enclosure 0 FILE( DATE �J S CITY OF EDMONDS FEE HEARING EXAMINER RECT APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE APO'S GL� HEARING DATE: APPLICANT �� S7YC�e_tt �e-���cla,.� ADDRESS_ F6 7 CITY & ZIP ����.. Cc}�T c�b'o?� PHONE_ 71�; S'G Z.. - INDICATE TYPE OR DEGREE OF INTEREST IN PROPERTY 6147.1uo LOCATION OR ADDRESS OF PROPERTY �`` �A�- �tu LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY I�- VARIANCE REQUESTED: !�-L (� � �..c,-�.t.,�, :,_ u"Ct'?l" FOR OFFICE USE ONLY: USE ZONE: Rv -1 Z ZONING ORDINANCE REQUIREMENT: Release/Hold Harmless Agreement The undersigned applicant, his heirs and assigns, in consideration for the City processing the application agrees to release, indemnify, defend and hold the City of Edmonds harmless from any and all damages and/or claims for damages, including reasonable attorneys' fees, arising from any action or inaction is based in whole or in part upon .false, misleading or incomplete information furnished by the applicant, his agents or employees. Permission to Enter Subject Property The undersigned applicant grants his, her or its permission for public officials and the staff of the City of Edmonds to enter the subject prbperty for the purpose of inspection and posting, attendant/)to nthis application. Signatur` of Applicant, Representative er or 0 �r-a»/J�;+cd��a...G:i`�t�."�a�a9r:C�.;r,..1:E,J6.�l,..a,::�;�".1.�.,,..,:1i.� ...uw.... _..,..ice...__ ,.....�cs�.x..w..:..:.,..I ._.... . .._..-•___....v_w., .... ...,.i. DECLARATIONS OF APPLICANT Please answer all questions 1. What are the physical characteristics, (i.e. topography, shape of lot, etc.) which create a hardship for you in regard to development of your property? fi O'I /! s) � r 2. Now does your property differ from other property in the same vicinity? i� (` �'_ � �� /? � t, �% 1�1� (. �� � � I G •(� �1 Y - � C d �--� � ^I"!l'2 � t; �tC � G>) � �' �i � l'S jj 1AZ G1- C/O j5( f 5 /f Cc"LL LdC3z�.r f �bcvz: t S-C cL !Z' 3. Will this variance be detrimental to the public or damaging to other property or improvements in the vicinity? C, 4. What hardships will result to you if the variance is not granted? Will these hardships have been caused by your own action? f a >, a-;, n r4.40 W. cWe l2l?ec� 1.lecl.�c�,��, fey S. Can you make reasonable use of your property without the variance? /—) O . �..'. ` .., t :. a ..Wu._. �._�. f+l.i.�f�i�.'i—L.aM Ma.3:L...Yu.. n..r..r N.vL.. �... .....� ♦.......Y. .._....�..... .. .. ... .... .. 1. __a _�� �4 4 CooLr -� L �.. r� 1. a-t - C' V 1 � f Cc f c /^+ i9 Pf, k 7 -7 , L39/Z ,C�r��,,,,���s c v��: g�v 6 Id v i 0 ` ^ ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER LIST ' PLEASE LIST ALL STREET ADDRESSES OF RESIDENTS OF PROPERTY ` WITHIN 80 FEET OF THE PROPERTY LINES OF THE SITE. ALSO ' LIST NAMES AND MAILING ADDRESSES OF OWNERS OF ]HUES�� SAME PROPERTIES. (THIS INFORMATION MAY BE OBTAINED FROM THE ' COUNTY ASSESSOR / s OFFlCE.. IF A BANK IS LISTED AS OWNER/ N ` N PLEASE INCLUDE LOAN NUMBER NEXT TO INDIVIDUAL /S NAME.) ^�. --~ _ / / /} F- 4�Li.'d)`.r�.'x...k.._..... ✓ �y." „�,...._...�..... ,. ...__..i......-. ....0 .._......a..u�.a:.nau..':x I e. u. n...e.a,.tiu�....,.w.u...+...w.�.._...�....wa...u.+a.e�..��r.. Thomas Karasek/Resident 1117 9th Ave. N. Edmonds, WA 98020 Dennis Howard/Resident 1111 9th Ave. N. Edmonds, WA 98020 Louis Zulauf/Resident 1025 9th Ave. N. Edmonds, 14A 98020 Ron & Ann Reisner 1019 9th Ave. N. Edmonds, WA 98020 Mr. Fisher 1017 9th Ave. N. Edmonds, WA 98020 Jack Merrill/Resident 845 Brookmere Drive Edmonds, WA 98020 Resident 846 Brookmere Drive Edmonds, WA 98020 Robert Thunder/Resident 840 Brookmere Drive Edmonds, WA 98020 Neil Rodgers/Resident 1012 9th Ave. N. Edmonds, WA 98020 Robert De Long/Resident 1106 9th Ave. N. Edmonds, WA 98020 James Borden/Resident 904 Hindley Lane Edmonds , ILIA 98020 A.B. & Gunnlauq Straume 907 Hindley Lane Edmonds, WA 98020 CAD ■ :--? I ■ :::'1 WE r LO N 7 N � •r 00 _ al r 3 � V r�- Z C.) .— �s� t2' sommi a m N MClog = 1 5= U � t S E 3 0 LO s= cm O Oagagaa r i) Ira .N S. 0) to a r— S. O •r � Ign 3 ..a a--, O S✓ :3 G.) 0 G 0 OGGG0 S. v > o 0 S. 4— i •r 0 3 a � s✓ O •1-) Ln N N Y •r Rf !_ S. N c� fu r C :! n H 1 C I , ) f kgo sa .: 4' , „,/. J at 14A4 1 it as I too y` . of it oaaa .:. t'61 ., ,.. t,all 40,61, �•:1.••:. ): } , , 1 I � ( 1 ® t :.0 �p ' r ,.., I, •, \ r ti so , 1,,. A ', A . y.• ® !S A. ®ca rg C -X, 16.1.1 .81 ad A u \ 1at 14* a :, r i �� r 1 '' r• ll . H J Y 41 \ t \J I •• , - } N Y I • q: \ n1, .,1 _ s { 1 1 �., "x ) {. o xn,�a ,t 01 VV' ' G 2t.` ,t . „1.8 �1 ; lL J fit .:•No or 1 ,6 0 4 O : 1,: H S � 6 1 aA ? 1 i aIY�{ ! - r:r:, . . a : r? too 1 40 4.114 �. ,. ,� , .��:. ;hot all :�;'; Posts, k A x n1 fit••:! �j •.l nll r( [' t, mom a`'imri-Pa rto, I 1n Ill / Y.Y• 41 ..off, t t• O ti 1 t 6.11 "< "It so I all 0 IV 6trlr ...7 - a Si old .1 .1� se e- rN Pot I 1 419 to. off or 1 AV "Well € ' ' pj �S(v t I s. P. ' sat ::IJ 1 t{-Ti�'elry . ✓ `tn t: : '1'r%`:!� rrtiLV lam. S `\v\ attic P ..`t r, •tr �. .�,_ c L i I ass-. i If , ai `I. Vv "i r i 1 I. _ t a81 1 lot �.� )� `. t ,I'r �JY-P3• i rla also lasso /•IirL� \\ r ♦° ., S5`L�S'1, "'t f r I; i'• i 1 �� . �b f �ti, ;• �\ ice. to M J \� r �rlr of }-It at a a or Us air , rtr ?,f. �} aa r.: to + A ask Of oto Pa att". as • ,Ltj7: 1 (, ,1 �s j'lyd ' A' iI 16. ', .1': r, :Y.. RI Pa t Paolo, I It i.,' ,9 �,n t ,I. • •i \, , :. -/ t r,at ;r1 1::'it � � ,, ( ,:a ... t I ti 'a Yt t . ! r 1 ;; ', L'• r, } rt oil--' , t at or to Pa, a._1 {r:': 1r+ ' ' t. M i Ila lose toori, all •�!ll L{fit l rail•i �:':.....:::.� •oJt r. �.1/tr(Il tli lT` s l r t artist t"Taffi- tJrl,. Y� '6•, rr •r t.of �•' or Ila IIy Y'. l+r:�:�1�;�./t • joLI r tlri. '. r. yy��+ !.'r t41 .. l- + . . f IJ I ., •Ill .( •1 t ,.• x ' t. 1' •. 1 +(ijt -Pa9 C.lot .... c fill,, .. Du O w C t 1 p m st -0 lv Pj �, N Q1 N (D n st (D V) fi slam O 0 sv Q J s o Tast N z v m � o n (< -s O Aaamass C O fi CS A< 5 < ,slaogo (D TIC 'S CID 00 O LO O (D C cat Q zr O ast Is C+ (D it 5 C'+. 1 =r 0 ly N =5 Uri 3 to ly cat D w (D J Y W CI•O�.�, • M N J N v c _ 0 *. (D A O� Iv - r< 3 n st —+ O .1 E N SL fit N t 1 C Issa1 _ IT 1• s7� at iU o assas ,J 5 N t ,7r ON >y • J n rn 0 /a 70 rn offic 1 in { rn a N Ul r J 00 is ceA •. 1 � to 1 O m 10 al ' -:.0 D F— N total ..0 G. Lrt . - Ci N a Itao"" I Q `i 0D _ �. • r CJ Z N M Q s U Ito s S- �� E r L l I O s ii CC) Q' r•— • -11 Et! CC) Cl > � W a--) :.f3 LL rn(a Ldu) C cm)C s O u L 3 0 4-) J �✓ O Soot. C O > S- O 00 s a 4- c 3 •r O s z3 O O Q U W S— U ' � N � (t3 N •r f� 1✓ S. C) � (0 r -O a F_ l0 00 1 1 `YJ r�—I P4 4.3 4-3 In •rI 4 Cl) cn _ cd cd 0 U U N O t0 .(r1: Fq 00 0 cd0> a (� am O ,n U) p r=4 chin a O F— • •I to- > Ott, I ltl' I :..01 1 g'toot 0.%} •' .'1 r . • 1. w` • i .1 ,;•r ti1yy :'1']y l ) a \ sm 0 l