The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPermit 84-24-V - SHEPARD - VARIANCE84-24-v 51st avenue south 152nd street hm shepard . �rl. v3 ALA ▪ 1908 4 City d Tukwila • 6200 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila Washington 98188 September 12, 1984 H.M. SHEPARD 13503 Empire Way S. Seattle, WA 98178 RE: Variance Application 84 -24 -V Dear. Mr. Shepard This letter is formal notification that on September 6, 1984,.the Board • of Adjustment denied this application due to nonconformance with Section 18.72.020, Tukwila Municipal Code. Section 18.90.030 of the Code' stipulates that any appeal of the Board's decision must be filed in King County Superior Court by September 17, 1984. Pursuant to our most recent telephone conversation I assume you are continuing to explore the single building alternative with the Fire Department, Building Official and your contractor. I am available to'. confirm zoning regulations in this effort. Sincere Ric — reeler Associate Planner RB /blk cc: Planning Director Building Official ■ Gary L VanDusen, Mayor - • INTRODUCTION CITY OF TUKWILA PLANNING DIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT ADENDUM IV) B. 84 -24 -V: H.M. Sheppard AGENDA ITEM Final consideration of this application was tabled from the August 2, 1984, public hearing specifically to the September 6, 1984 public hearing. In the interim, the applicant and staff were to evaluate the development alternatives on the property which would less the need for variances. On August 15, 1984, the applicant sub- mitted the attached revised site plan following discussions with the Planning and Fire Departments. The result is the need for a variance from the front yard set- back, front yard landscaping requirement, and alternatively, parking requirements. FINDINGS The following corrections or additions to previously issued findings are hereby entered: 3. This finding is amended to read: The proposed development is located on the property so that the following variances are required: 1. 3' variance from the 30' front yard building setback. 2. 5' variance from the front yard landscaping requirement. 3. 2 parking stall variance from the parking requirements. TMC 18.56.050 requires a minimum number of two parking spaces per unit for a total of 16 parking stalls. The applicant intends to include either 16 stalls if the variance is granted from the front yard landscaping requirement, or 15 stalls if a parking variance is granted without varying from the front yard landscaping requirements. This provides a choice of meeting the parking requirements or the landscaping requirements. The public notice for this public hearing included these two variances in order to provide the Board of Adjustment with flexibility in decision - making. 4. (New Finding) The revised site plan includes new features of 1 handicapped parking stall, provisions for garbage container space, and adequate turnaround for vehicles in the proposed parking lot area. Fire Department approval has been given to this site plan. Page -2- Board of Adjustment 84 -24 -V: H.M. Sheppard September 6, 1984 2. Variance Criteria TMC 18.72.020(2): • CONCLUSIONS The conslusions of the originally issued staff report are hereby amended or addi- tions made: 1. Variance Criteria TMC 18.72.020(1): "The variance shall not constitute a grant of special privilege incon- sistent with the limitation upon uses of other properties in the vicinity and in the zone in which the property on behalf of which the application was filed is located." Available records do not indicate similar variances were granted in the area. Some of the existing development appears to be nonconforming relative to some of the building setback requirements of the Zoning Code. Most noticeable is the nonconformance with the front yard landscaping requirement and possibly the front yard building setback, although measurements cannot be feasibly taken to conform this conclusion. Sufficient basis (visual inspection) appears to exist to adequately conclude that granting the front yard building setback variance and landcaping variance would not confer a "special privile- ge" upon the subject property. Drawing the same conclusions relative to the requested relaxation of the parking requirements is more tenuous and less able to be substantiated. However, the existing relatively new multi - family deve- lopment along 52nd Ave. So., easterly of the subject site, appears to not pro- vide the required off - street parking per code requirements. Therefore, it would appear on the basis of available information that the requested varian- ces could be approved without conferring a "special privilege" upon the sub- ject property. "The variance is necessary because of special circumstances relating to the size, shape, topography, location or surrounding of the subject pro- perty in order to provide it with use rights and privileges permitted to other properties in the vicinity and in the zone in which the subject property is located." Physical characteristics of the subject property place dimensional restraints on its development. These restraints appear to be the same or similar to those of properties in the area and in the R -4 zone thereby constricting deve- lopment thereon. While the dimensional limitations of the property restrict development alter- natives the site design selected by the applicant for development of two inde- pendent four -plex buildings creates the nonconformance with the front yard building setback and front yard landscaping requirements, or deviation from the parking requirements of the Zoning Code. If combined into a single eight - plex building it appears the setback requirements could easily be met and that additional area for compliance with the parking requirements could be pro- Page -3- Board of Adjustment 84 -24 -V: H.M. Sheppard September 6, 1984 vided. The applicant's choice continues to be of the stock four -plex building plans for the property. Some argument could be made that the "pipe stem" configuration of the property and access thereto adequately constitutes a "special circumstance" thereby constituting sufficient basis for approval of the application. Inarguably if the proposal was located adjacent to a public street, probably the typical location and situation for a multi - family zoned property, the need for the variances would probably not occur. Development could very likely not require the requested variances. Confirmation of this conclusion rests in a myriad of assumptions which are beyond the scope of the variance process to evaluate. However, the specific subject property appears to be sufficiently unusual in its location at the end of a private access easement in the R -4 zone. 5. Variance Criteria TMC 18.72.020(5): "The granting of such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant possessed by the owners of other properties in the same zone or vicinity." Uncontested, and unaffected by the granting or denial of the variance, is the applicant's ability to construct multi - family dwelling units on the property, reasonably of the eight units intended in the subject proposal. However, a "property right" usually is not interpreted to include the right to develop property per individual design perogative while producing noncompliance with existing zoning regulations. Instead the usual expectation is that develop- ment of property by right contains the basic assumption of design formulation in accordance with the underlying zoning requirements. Available information provided by the applicant indicates the granting of the variances are not in the context of preservation of rights but preservation of an indi vidual design perogative which produces the need for the variances. The adjacent westerly and northerly properties are developed as single family residential older housing stock. This makes clear finding of this variance criteria on behalf of the applicant difficult since development potential and conformance with the R -4 zoning requirements (of which these properties are within) depends on ultimately removing the existing residences to accomodate multi - family development. Therefore, the property rights of the applicant are similar to these properties. It is not apparent that the applicant would be denied a "substantial property right" which is also "...possessed by the owners of other properties in the same zone or vicinity." Based upon available evidence it would appear the same property rights exist and characterize all of these properties. RECOMMENDATION Because of the inability to find TMC 18.72.020(5) in favor of the application, staff is unable to recommend approval of the variance application. , • Page -4- Board of Adjustment ( 84 -24 -V: H.M. Sheppard September 6, 1984 ATTACHMENTS E.- Revised Site Plan RB /blk (BOA.SHEP1 BOA.SHEP2) Should the Board of Adjustment wish to grant the variances on the subject site for the subject development staff would express a preference for diminishment of one parking stall along the northerly property line in order to provide the required 15' of landscaping. However, the proposed 10' of landscaping could be supple - mented by a fence, thereby producing adequate buffering and screening of the parking area along this portion of the property. It is also recommended that the Board of Adjustment very clearly stipulate this variance is not a precedent for future variance requests. • LANDSCApE Cc:4.MR era AMIETAIMIFAIANIFACIAPWAPINCIFIVAIrAddrAb HYD. EXHIBIT I • 17.7 1 I. ; f ! p fF. rir) 1 ,----- . 1984-1 i- ILA 1 PLANNING DEPT. 000 eta 16-t .5 0°-0 -74 to • . • raLSILkaaijitlAanfilik. *ALA JA 4 City of Tukwila 1909 ...4 ea,Mric d2' "T.'.^. Z 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila Washington 98188 Gary L VanDusen, Mayor . CITY OF TUKWILA NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING OF THE TUKWILA BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Tukwila BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT has fixed the 6th day of September, 1984, at 8:00 p.m. in City Council Chambers of Tukwila City Hall, 6200 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, Washington, as the time and place for: 84 -24 -V: H.M. Shepard, variances of 3 feet from the front yard building setback of TMC 18.50.020, 5 feet from the front yard landscaping require- ment of TMC 18.52.020, and 2 parking stall reduction of the requirement of TMC 18.56.050. Any and all interested persons are invited to attend. Published: Record Chronicle Date: August 27, 1984 Distrubtion: Mayor City Clerk Adjacent Property Owners Project File c ,c CITY OF TUKWILA PLANNING DIVISION BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT' . STAFF REPORT IV) B. , 84 -24 -V: H.M. Sheppard AGENDA ITEM INTRODUCTION The applicant is purchasing the subject property which was part of a short sub- division approved in 1979 (Exhibit A). Access to the property is via a 30' ease- ment to S. 151st St. Development of two four -plex buildings is proposed under existing zoning of R -4. Due to the approximately square shape of the property and the proposed design of the buildings, the applicant requires three variances. FINDINGS 1. The subject property is essentially level and measures 126' (north and south property lines) by 146.24' (east and west property lines). Access to the site is at the northeast,corner by 30' easement. Proposed development of two four - plex buildings (Exhibit B) incorporates the access and parking along the easterly portion of the property. 2. Assignment of front and rear and sideyards per TMC 18.50.020 was made by staff in coordination with the applicant to be: 1. Front yard with a building setback of 30' along the northerly pro- perty line. 2. Rear yard 25' building setback along the southerly property line. 3. Side yards of 8' setback along the east and west property lines. These yard requirements maximized conformance of the proposal with the Zoning Code and considered of the Uniform Building Code requirements. 3. The proposed development is located on the property so that the following variances are required: 1. 4' variance from the 30' front yard building setback. 2. 5' variance from the rear yard building setback. 3. Variance from TMC 18.56.040(4)(A) to allow tandem parking in front of the units. Parking is intended to include one covered stall per unit with sufficient space behind these stalls for parking of an additional vehicle in a tandem Page -2- Board of Adjustment 84- 24 -.V: H.M. Sheppard August 2, 1984 .. !.1? configuration. TMC 18.56.040(4)(A) requires that the covered vehicles be able to exit the structure without requiring movement of another vehicle. CONCLUSIONS 1. Variance Criteria TMC 18.72.020(1): "The variance shall not constitute a grant of special privilege incon- sistent with the limitation upon uses of other properties in the vicinity and in the zone in which the property on behalf of which the application was filed is located." Available records do not indicate similar variances were granted in the area or that existing development was located in a nonconforming way to have the similar affect as proposed by the applicant. Therefore, the proposed varian- ces would appear to grant "special privileges" inconsistent with the existing building setbacks of the area. In addition, the compliance with the building setback requirements of the Zoning Code is attainable if the two independent four -plex buildings are combined into a single eight -plex building. Tandem parking is highly unusual and is nonexistent in the City. Therefore, it would appear on the basis of information available to staff and provided by the applicant that the requested variances would reasonably constitute "special privileges inconsistent with the limitations upon uses of other pro- perties in the vicinity and in the zone..." 2. Variance Criteria TMC 18.72.020(2): "The variance is necessary because of special circumstances relating to the size, shape, topography, location or surrounding of the subject pro- perty in order to provide it with use rights and privileges permitted to other properties in the vicinity and in the zone in which the subject property is located." Physical characteristics of the subject property place dimensional restraints on its development. These restraints appear to be the same or similar to those of properties in the area and in the R -4 zone thereby constricting deve- lopment thereon. While the dimensional limitations of the property restrict development alter- natives the site design selected by the applicant for development of two inde- pendent four -plex buildings creates the nonconformance with the front and rear yard required building setbacks. If combined into a single eight -plex building it appears the setback requirements could easily be met and that additional area for compliance with the parking requirements could be pro- vided. 3. Variance Criteria TMC 18.72.020(3): "The granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vici- nity and in the zone in which the subject property is situated." Page -3- Board of Adjustment 84 -24 -V: H.M. Sheppard August 2, 1984 4. Variance criteria TMC 18.72.020(4): 5. Variance Criteria TMC 18.72.020(5): The nature of the variances and the ultimate development of the property would appear to not reasonably produce detriment or injury to the public or adjacent properties in the area. Argument could be made that construction of buildings closer than the normally required building setbacks may in some way adversely impact the property values of the adjoining properties. While difficult to substantiate and document this assertion often accompanies such variance requests. "The authorization of such variance will not adversely affect the imple- mentation of the Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan." The net affect of the variances does not appear to impact the permitted den- sity on the property. In addition, the net result does not appear to be an appreciable decrease in the amount of open space, light and /or air surrounding the development. The multi - family residential land use designation for the property is maintained and impacts on the neighborhood are minimal. "The granting of such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant possessed by the owners of other properties in the same zone or vicinity." Uncontested, and unaffected by the granting or denial of the variance, is the applicant's ability to construct multi - family dwelling units on the property, reasonably of the eight units intended in the subject proposal. However, a "property right" usually is not interpreted to include the right to develop property per individual design perogative while producing the noncompliance with existing zoning regulations. Instead the usual expectation is that development of property by right contains the basic assumption of design for- mulation in accordance with the underlying zoning requirements. Available information provided by the applicant indicates the granting of the variances are not in the context of preservation of rights but preservation of an indi- vidual design perogative which produces the need for the variances. RECOMMENDATION Based upon the above staff recommends denial of the variance application. Should the Board of Adjustment wish to grant the variances on the subject site for the subject development staff would recommend decreasing the space between the two buildings in order to increase the front and rear yard setback areas, thereby minimizing the amount of the variances and impact on adjacent properties. It is also recommended that the Board of Adjustment very clearly stipulate this variance is not a precedent for future variance requests regarding tandem parking. Page -4- Board of Adjustment 84 -24 -V: H.M. Sheppard August 2, 1984 ATTACHMENTS A - Short Subdivision B - Site Plan C - Master Application D - Variance Application RB /blk (BOA.SHEP) • 1 20' Date Short P1at No 252.o0' so. I Si MD Sr VACATED Land Surveyor's Certificate: This short plat correctly survey made by me or un in conformance with appropriate state properly staked Tukwila Subdiv 0i m a138 33' 07 /26,00' , i 30 ; , . l W� •� 8.8 G7 IN ( t kil s /16• I u1 iEI • 2 I O EASEMENT W FOR , ( SEER t ir�il, } +tS .1 30 _ — Nat, .5o7 __/ .OQ_ - - - -- 3 Lac eMerit' cor r miwAfrr f 6, M ► O 0 ' tit 8e° 33` p 7 „ ■ resents a di = ion of en the Certificate No. A13/3 EXHIBIT A so' 0. SET e.h?P b 113” Re sAt L S 4 ' / 3343 • �a►un MON. tia,sti ,-,4,vc.l041 WE-41 LINe o'F TH E o r Se 3 Tz3 a R-Yc +M Z.E. N Ol 17' 35'E Page 4 of 4 ~ / MASTER LAND DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FORM PLEASE RITE LEGIBLY OR TYPE ALL REQUESTED INFORMATION-!INCOMPLETE APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED FOR PROCESSING. SECTION I1: PROJECT INFORMATION ) CITY OF TU KV LA Central Permit System DESCRIBE BRIEFLY THE PRO CT Y • SECTION 111: APPLICANT'S AFFIDAVIT SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN BEFORE ME THIS / SECTION 1: GENERAL DATA TYPE OF APPLICATION: D BsIP O S PLAT E J S U B D I V I S I O N DS PO IT E D PRD DPMUD INTERURBAN • CONDUSEONAL QUNUSESSVj0R1ANGE rlcmG. ZONING ❑AMENDMENT )224 -4 25 9 NAME / APPLICANT: 1 TEL E ( -./ Q ADDRESS /85195 - 1 W �3, �,. !�/t G ZIP 90/ 7 D 2) PROP. OWNER: NAME TELEPHONE ( ) 243 l5$3 ADDRESS !2I4 z7cA / 3) PROJECT LOCATION: (STREET ADDRESS, GEOGRAPHIC, LOT /BLOCK) ZIP 5) ANTICIPATED PERIOD OF CONS UCTION: FROM 6 ) 'WILL PROJECT BE DEVELOPED .1 N PHASES? DYES ' � NO I F YES, DESCRIBE: C07ht PROJECT STATISTICS: �� A) ACREAGE OF PROJECT SITE: NET /, + GROSS EASEMENTS B) FLOORS OF CONSTRUCTION: TOTALI Z INCLUDES• 0 BASEMENT 0MEZZANINE TOTAL GROSS INCLUDES: BASEMENT Q MEZZANINE FLOOR AREA C) SITE UTILIZATION: EXISTING •PROPOSED NOTES . ZONING DESIGNATION COMP. PLAN DESIGNATION BUILDING FOOTPRINT AREA Z, X o' 9, a 2. ' O O LANDSCAPE AREA . 0 0 / o O PAVING AREA 1 ' O O TOTAL PARKING STALLS: -STANDARD SIZE. - COMPACT SIZE • - HANDICAPPED SIZE TOTAL LOADING SPACES AVER. SLOPE OF PARKING AREA AVER. SLOPE OF SITE 8) IS THIS SITE DESIGNATED FOR SPECIAL CONSIDERATION ON THE CITY'S ENVIRONMENTAL BASE MAP? ❑ YES 'NO , BEING DULY SWORN, DECLARE THAT I AM THE CONTRACT PURCHASER OR OWNER OF THE PROPERTY INVOLVED IN THIS APPLICATION AND THAT THE FORE- GOING STATEMENTS AND ANSWERS HEREIN CONTAINED AND THE INFORMATION HEREWITH SUBMITTED ARE IN ALL RESPECTS TRUE AND CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. DATE P /.22- s7/ DAY OF NOTA- PLDL C 1 A FOR STATE OF WASHINGTON RESIDING AT PROPOS$ 25 ' 2 D4 TO 71019 SLI. I9 X (SIGNATURE OF CON CT PURCHASER Ml-) EXHI.BIT C CITY OF TUI(VILA Central Permit System MASTER LAND DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FORM 1) TUKWILA MUNICIPAL CODE Fr; :1-- p!--F0 JUN 1 2 19841 CITY' OE PLANNING DEPT. S C H E D U E LAND USE VARIANCE TMC) SECTIONS FROM WHICH YOU ARE REQUESTING VARIANCE: DESCRIBE THE VARIANCE ACTION WHICH YOU ARE REQUESTING: .{-st LC.' r ,7 6 i..41‘e- < "tg•CO Waif e0r7 /414AP) 44W' 26 ,i.r VAR I CE IS APPROVED : -.•; ERTY , AND THE PROPOSE ,USE • T HE - ERTY I F THE • 3) DESCRIBE THE PRESENT USE 0 THE P .SJ DESCRIBE THE MANNER 'IN WH1CH'.YOU BELIEVE THAT YOUR REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE SATISFIES EACH OF THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA AS SPECIFIED IN TMC 18.72.020 (ATTACHADDJTIONAL SHEETS IF NECESSARY). 1) THE VARIANCE SHALL NOT CONSTITUTE A GRANT OF SPECIAL PRIVILEGE INCONSISTENT WITH THE LIMITATION UPON USES OF.OTHER PROPERTIES IN THE VICINITY AND IN THE ZONE IN WHICH THE PROPERTY ON BEHALF OF WHICH THE APPLICATION WAS FILED IS LOCATED. RESPONSE: 2 ) THE VARIANCE IS NECESSARY BECAUSE OF SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES RELATING'TO THE SIZE, SHAPE, TOPOGRAPHY', LOCATION OR SURROUNDING OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IN ORDER TO PROVIDE IT WITH USE RIGHTS AND PRIVILEGES PERMITTED TO OTHER PROPERTIES IN THE VICINITY AND IN THE ZONE 1 N WHICH' THE BJ ECT _ PROPERTY /S LOCATED. RESPONSE: THE,GRANTING OF SUCH VARIANCE WILL NOT BE MATERIALLY DETRIMENTAL TO THE PUBLIC WELFARE OR INJURIOUS TO THE PROPERTY OR IMPROVEMENTS IN THE VICINITY AND IN THE ZONE IN WHICH THE SUBJECT PROPERTY 1S SITUATED. RESPONSE: 4 ) THE AUTHORIZATION OF SUCH VARIANCE WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE POLICY PLAN. RESPONSE: THE GRANTING OF SUCH VARIANCE IS NECESSARY FOR THE PRESERVATION AND ENJOYMENT OF. A SUBSTANTIAL PROPERTY RIGHT OF THE APPLICANT POSSESSED BY THE OWNERS OF OTHER PROPERTIES IN THE SAME ZONE OR VICINITY. yl ., RESPONSE: EXHIBIT D NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Tukwila Board of Adjustment has fixed the 2nd day of August, 1984, at 8:00 p.m. in City Council Chambers of Tukwila City Hall, 6200 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, Washington, as the time and place for: pPA. 84-05-V: Bon Marche (Allied Stores), variance of 3 feet from the side yard landscaping requirement to TMC 18.52.020. Applicant requested extension to' August 2, 1984 meeting. 84 -24 -V: H.M. Sheppard,,variances of 4 feet from front yard building setback from TMC 18.50.020 and non - tandem parking requirment of TMC 18.56.040(4)(A). CITY OF TUKWILA Notice of Public Hearings of the Tukwila Board of Adjustment• C. 84 -25 -V: Meyer Sign Co., variance from TMC 19.32.150 to permit a ten- ant sign on an existing freestanding Pavilion Outlet Center shopping center identification sign. All interested persons are invited to attend: Published: Record Chronicle Date: July 22, 1984 Distribution: City Clerk Project Files Public Notice File Adjacent Property Owners ,•` vi i - �\ •, .dam : :i :e7:'. �.,- T,. I. WI 'w � OM LEGISIMD . d e r • 9 UIts'• . r ' \I '. 1 6 ( C, r C � -1 H; i;•i 1 „ 1984 C1 CEPT. • •, 11.. :1 f' \ I ir2-1'..•: p .-•'• Ias ■ 11 "`, �, D 1 Z p IV 'fit ` F 115D \V 1i 4: lit ijiN�Gro r i 1� {/ est T noev I 1 „tow O -p A•IQO ❑ A-• 0...e0\ �Oq�A.TIAK tea. srnE N.A.'. AFS[EMW. ! , j il Y•4E WILY AESiiNTUt f •i • � � ! , I Q p..>= I f S.J.w.E WAY AESOEN 1 ArY ❑ tw z � .; �I. J T o w.a, aeseu+T14 ( J 1~ 1 I crr 0 1 4•241 NO FOw AUc. AFSoJ1W. I - 21,...., ......Ts # i 1 r i v_____ ce rl r C.114 ` .t 4 fi I � _ / J /' • R.& M 11 , ! f / •t Ni 11 J/ App„ za 7901250881 Adj oining. 4 LEGAL DESCRIPTION ` / SHORT PLAT NO W 78 - ss This space reserved for recorder's use Filed for record at the request of: TUKWILA, WASHINGTON CN��E�tH vy t (HRisTRIE M. EEY €Q.s Name Return to: Planning Division Office'of Community Development 6230 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 Lots 7 & 8 of Young's half acre tract's as recorded in Volume 16 of Plats, of Section 23, Township 23 North, Range 4 East. Together with portion Vacated S 152nd St Page 37, located in the NW% W.M., County of King, State • of Washington. Reviewed and'approved by the Sho. Subdivision Committee and hereby, certified for filing this day of SK.rwoo ry 19 l4 ..lai t Chai n, Short Subdivision Comm APPROVAL O A- C LJL DEPUTY ASSESSOR • d .s :i Lao V %_ ors u./ O.C.D. CITY Cr ILA( '!LA JAN 3 0 1979 DEPARTMENT OF ASSESSMENTS EXAMINED AND APPROVED THIS ' " S -- Day of JC_..VV , 192 //%4Z-<:- / ASSESS ZO 0 SD. 1 SZ ST VACATED Date Short Plat No: 01 N LU • 0 m 152.00' This short plat correctly survey made by me or un in conformance with appropriate state properly staked Tukwila Subdiv 3 /2-6,00' Land Surveyor's Certificate: (267,o0 — SH 33' 7 Certificate No. g? 4 Easement or ( ORM NAC7E resents a di ion of en the 0 ' 3 � g rr W�c Af 505 147 , fuV /26.00 uaLLa 2 EASEMENT FOR S E WE R t of t i +ies .A 301 ' i„ — /J883 3 07 ; Vv - t - - _/2 -0•0P - - - - - 0 M WI.I 0 O. CO • 0 \ 1P SG.ALE O : 7- .M''Pr cD sle z 42- /'/3343 IS • t of �,ca c�►JC� o WEST '- K3 t of TN€ 0.1,31/4 4 0 F- SEC. 2-3 �L3 ti1 �4 C W. MN .e.I401 Page 4 of 4 MASTER LAND DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FORM 1) TUKWILA MUNICIPAL CODE (TMC) SECTIONS FROM WHICH YOU ARE REQUESTING VARIANCE: 2) DESCRIBE THE VARIANCE ACT 1 ON WHICH YOU ARE REQUESTING: p as -,� 69- -ic c o-zze p.0-4 . cn way � � /1.ar- Zp /� 5- -/ 2 3) DESCRIBE THE PRESENT USE O THE P VARI CE IS APPROVED: DESCRIBE THE MANNER IN WHICHIYOU BELIEVE THAT YOUR REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE SATISFIES EACH OF THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA AS SPECIFIED IN TMC 18.72.020 (ATTACH.ADD.ITIONAL SHEETS IF: NECESSARY). 1) THE VARIANCE SHALL NOT CONSTITUTE A GRANT OF SPECIAL PRIVILEGE 1NCONSISTENT WITH THE LIMITATION UPON USES OF OTHER PROPERTIES IN THE VICINITY AND IN THE ZONE IN WHICH THE PROPERTY ON BEHALF OF WHICH THE APPLICATION WAS FILED IS LOCATED. 2) 3 ) CITY OF TU....JVILA Central Permit System RESPONSE: THE VARIANCE 1S NECESSARY BECAUSE OF SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES RELATING TO THE SIZE, SHAPE, TOPOGRAPHY, LOCATION OR SURROUNDING OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IN ORDER TO PROVIDE IT WITH USE RIGHTS AND PRIVILEGES PERMITTED TO OTHER PROPERTIES IN THE VICINITY AND IN THE ZONE IN WHICH' THE 541BJECT PROPERTY 15 ' LOCATED RESPONSE: THE GRANTING OF SUCH VARIANCE WILL NOT BE MATERIALLY DETRIMENTAL TO THE PUBLIC WELFARE OR INJURIOUS TO THE PROPERTY OR IMPROVEMENTS IN THE VICINITY AND IN THE ZONE IN WHICH THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS SITUATED. RESPONSE: RESPONSE: ✓Yt�m's'= -Q.� RESPONSE: � N 1 " 1984 • PLANNING DEPT. ERTY, AND THE PROPOSED USE • THE S C H E D U L E LAND USE VARIANCE ERTY 1F % ,TH E y am , ..' , ' "'/' 4) THE AUTHORIZATION OF SUCH VARIANCE WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE POLICY PLAN. 5 ) THE GRANTING OF SUCH VARIANCE IS NECESSARY FOR THE PRESERVATION AND ENJOYMENT OF A SUBSTANTIAL PROPERTY RIGHT OF THE APPLICANT POSSESSED BY THE OWNERS OF OTHER PROPERTIES I N THE SAME ZONE OR VICINITY. TMC 18.72.070 .PROHIBITED VARIANCE. UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES SHALL THE BOARD OF ADJUST - MENT GRANT A VARIANCE TO PERMIT A USE NOT GENERALLY OR CONDITIONALLY PERMITTED IN THE ZONE INVOLVED, OR ANY USE EXPRESSLY OR BY IMPLICATION PROHIBITED BY THE TERMS OF THIS' TITLE IN SAID ZONE. CITY OF TUK1k Central Permit System MASTER LAND DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FORM . PLEASE WRITE LEGIBLY OR TYPE ALL REQUESTED INFORMATION--INCOMPLETE ACCEPTED FOR PROCESSING. PROP. OWNER: NAME SECTION III: APPLICANT'S AFFIDAVIT 1, age" P.9 SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN BEFORE ME "zh m 1 S / DAY OF 1.: SECTION I: GENERAL DATA TYPE OF APPLICATION: OBSIP 0 SHORT 0SU13D!VISION DPRD OPMUD ri INT BA PLAT PERMIT 35 0 CONDITIONAL OUNCLASS • r-1 CHG. OF IM COM. PLAN USE USE VARIANCE ZONING 6JAMENOMENT APPLICANT: N A M E TELEHONE ADDRESS 8.5(95 ./1, • TELEPHONE ADDRESS PZ/d) .1 ' 017 Zr / PROJECT LOCATION: (STREET ADDRESS, GEOGRAPHIC, LOT/BLOCK) 7 Rs SECTION PROJECT INFORMATION 4) DESCRIBE BRIEFLY THE PRO CT Ye PROPOSE 5 ) 6) WILL PROJECT BE DEVELOPED.IN PHASES? OYES 7 a) ANTICIPATED PER 100 OF CONS -UCTION: FROM PROJECT STATISTICS: ACREAGE OF PROJECT SITE: NET A. ÷ A) B) C) FLOORS OF CONSTRUCTION: TOTAL/VFLOORS TOTAL. GROSS FLOOR AREA SITE UTILIZATION: ZONING DESIGNATION COMP. PLAN DESIGNATION BUILDING FOOTPRINT AREA.g..)(ozPf.g2. LANDSCAPE AREA 0 0 PAVING AREA 00 TOTAL. PARKING STALLS: -STANDARD SIZE. -COMPACT SIZE • -HANDICAPPED SIZE TOTAL LOADING SPACES AVER. SLOPE OF PARKING AREA AVER. SLOPE OF SITE IS THIS SITE DESIGNATED FOR SPECIAL MAP? OYES lap* 2b' EXISTIN3 0 0 GROSS CONSIDERATION ON THE To 9a. Sti ads NO IF YES, DESCRIBE: 1440 0 0 0 EASEMENTS 1 NCLUDES BASEMENT D ME Z ZAN I NE INCLUDES: BASEMENT DMEZZANINE PROPOSED NOTES CITy'S ENVIRONMENTAL BASE , BEING DULY SWORN, DECLARE THAT 1 AM THE CONTRACT PURCHASER OR OWNER OF THE PROPERTY INVOLVED IN THIS APPLICATION AND THAT THE FORE- GOING STATEMENTS AND ANSWERS HEREIN CONTAINED AND THE rNFORMAT1ON HEREWITH SUBMITTED ARE IN ALL RESPECTS TRUE AND CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BE IEF. ■, DATE - 199 NoTA BLiC I AN FOR ‘ THE STATE OF WASHINGTON RESIDING AT a-_ ) 224 - 12M ZIP M7S )2S3 /.5S3 ZIP (SIGNATURE OF CON CT PURCHASERAMM4WMEIR-) dr