The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutDDR2009-00119 BLD2009-00962 - DDR Application - 12/7/2009 MASON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 411 N. Fifth Street/P.O. Box 186, Shelton WA 98584 360.427.9670 ext. 352 DDR - 001 I Rec'd by Request for Administrative Variance for Reduction in the Required S tb cks ($115.00) For administrative review, the minimum variance on a setback est is 5 feet from the side yard lot lines and 10 feet for front and rear lot lines or any access easement. Request for further reduction requires a standard variance. Setbacks are measured from the furthest proiection of the structure including roof eaves. Applicant/Owners: l ► - N b lr-cc Mailing Address: I S 61QE: Of l Z6 ►-) Telephone : -'LA-IS - �5 a City: LZate: (2-A Zip: cQ If tJ reduction U tied to a building permit, please give permit case number. BLD ;?,j2)p9 - gOQq LQ 2-A, Parcel Number(s): 0,P.D.,33 -50 - D0004 Zoning--- �' Site Address: 1 -7 U1,4 Lu,-L P lAce-) Requested varianc . Front Rear/ Side Yard (please circle all that apply) Requested setback variance: 10 ft. An illustrated site plan is required. Your site plan must show the following: north arrow, abutting street or easements, set backs to all property lines and existing buildings, slopes, surface water, wetlands, critical areas, septic, well and driveway. Show all proposed new development. e foll ing circumstances must apply: RO AND OR REAR YARD REQUIREMENTS: 1) Existing lots of record as of March 5, 2002; You must meet one of the following: (Please circle all that apply) 2) One of the following exists on the lot: steep slopes, wetlands, or streams present; b soils that restrict building or septic development; c) lot width at the front yard line of no more than 50 feet; d) lot size of no more than one-fourth acre; \\CLUSTERI_HOME_SERVER\HOME\COMMON\COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT\PAC\VARIANCES\2009 Adminstrative.var.doc Updated: 12-15-2008 e isting improvements of buildings, septic systems, and well areas. SIDE YARD REQUIREMENTS: 1) Existing lots of record as of March 5, 2002; You must meet one of the following. (Please circle all that apply) 2) One of the following exists on the lot: a) steep slopes, wetlands, or streams present; b) soils that restrict building or septic development; c) lot width at the front yard line of no more than 50 feet; d) lot size of no more than one-half acre; e) existing improvements of buildings, septic systems, and well areas. Explain how these circumstances preclude a reasonable development proposal from meeting the setback standard for Rural Residential 2.5, 5, 10, or 20 zones. o v ld r .t t o► j- � _10ACk- Owner/Agent(please indicate) Signature and date Official Use Only Approved DateG �G Denied Date Reason for denial: \\CLUSTERI HOME SERVER\HOME\COMMON\COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT\PAC\VARIANCES\2009 Adminstrative.var.doc Updated: 12-15-2008 Charles and Valerie Johnson PO Box 294 — Union,WA 98592 Telephone: 360.898.4799 email: cjandvj@yahoo.com TO BE KEPT IN THE R � V E D Ms. Kell McAboy IC Mason County Planning Department PARCEL FILE Nov 2 2006 P.O. Box 279 ' Shelton, WA 98584 "�SACih CC.pi P�lP�IhG DEPT. 50 -0000j November 18, 2006 Dear Kell, We are writing this because of a concern we have regarding the neighboring property, currently owned by Bill and Teri Abrams, at 15-17 E. Waterwheel Place in Union. The tax parcel is 32233-50-00004 and is waterfront property on Hood Canal that includes a two-bedroom house as well as a one-bedroom cabin. We understand from a recent conversation with the Abrams that they plan to replace the shed behind their two-bedroom house with a new garage, add a second story to this new structure, and also tie it into and expand their existing two- bedroom house at 17 E. Waterwheel Place. We understand that they are under the impression that they will be allowed to make all of these changes according to the "10% rule", thereby avoiding the variance process. Approximately half of this parcel containing the two-bedroom house and detached shed has zero setback from Hood Canal shoreline, as well as being located within a category three stream buffer. According to extensive notes made in the Mason County record in 2002 by Pam Bennett-Cumming, (see attached), there are also several other layers of ordinance that would need to be complied with. We would like to offer additional information in this letter to provide some historical background so that more of the facts regarding this property can be taken into consideration before the Planning Department makes a final decision whether to allow the variance process to be avoided. The property was originally part of an eight acre tract purchased by Edwin and Ethel Dalby in 1917, and consisted of their home on the east side of Dalby Creek as well as 9 cabins on the west side of Dalby Creek on the water side of the former alignment of State Route 106. In 1979 this property was subdivided into 4 discrete parcels and deeded to the four Dalby children. In 1979 the parcel under discussion passed to Gwenwyn Dalby Abrams, the mother of Bill Abrams 1 and Valerie Johnson. At the time of the deed transfer to Vaughn and Gwen Abrams, there were two of the original cabins, but no septic or water serving the parcel. Vaughn and Gwen developed the property, including a new septic system (1981) and a well (date uncertain, but probably 1981-1982). They also added fill material that was excavated from the development of the Blue Heron Condos (55 dump truckloads) as well as a concrete and rock bulkhead built by Vaughn Abrams. When they wished to replace the most water ward cabin with a new house in 1983-4, they applied to Mason County and were granted a variance in order to increase the original footprint of the cabin (20' X 21'). Unfortunately, they built the house too close to the eastern property line as they measured from the wall of the house instead of from the drip line, but were not required to make any correction, even though the planner was aware of the mistake. To date the southeast corner of the house is less than 2' from the east property line. After the house was completed, Vaughn built the shed and lean-to approximately 7' behind and to the south of the new construction, without obtaining a building permit or conforming to current building codes. Further, in 1994 Vaughn and Gwen applied for a building permit to add an unheated storage room to the west side of the house, which was completed in 1995. After the final inspection was completed for the "storage room", the room was connected with an inside door to the main part of the house and finished with insulation, windows, drywall, electric lighting, heating, and flooring material as the second bedroom for the home. This addition expanded the house by nearly 50%. After Vaughn and Gwen Abrams passed away (2000), Bill Abrams was allowed to have his choice of the waterfront parcel or the parcel to the east, which had on it a 1930's era cottage straddling the western property line. He chose the developed parcel with the relatively new house and newly updated cabin and Valerie was given the adjacent streamside property. Since Bill and his wife, Teri, took possession of the parcel they have used the house and cabin primarily as rental units, maintaining their 5 bedroom house with 3 car garage in southern California as their primary residence. The cabin is rented as a one-bedroom unit and the house as a two-bedroom unit, even though the septic system was designed for two bedrooms only. The cabin has no septic system, but was connected by Vaughn Abrams with underground pipes in shallow trenches sometime in the 1980s. Currently Bill and Teri Abrams are also using the same septic system for their travel trailer, connected last fall by Bill Abrams, again with a series of underground pipes in shallow trenches. One of our concerns with the granting of the 10% expansion is the further taxing of an already overburdened septic system located within a few feet of Hood Canal. In the last year the Abrams were cited for attempting to build a breezeway connecting the 2 bedroom house with the shed without a permit, and were required by Mason County Planning to remove the illegal construction. They have removed all but one 2" X 4" that remains connected to both structures. We 2 I believe that they received information from the building department that if just one board is left in place, it will show that the two structures are connected, and will somehow further the case they are attempting to build with Mason County to allow the proposed construction to proceed according to their wishes. It appears that Bill and Teri Abrams have already appealed to Mason County Planning regarding the development of this property (2002) and after a field visit, the planner at the time, Pam Bennett-Cumming, filed an extensive report. Later, when they spoke with a different planner, Scott Longanecker, he told them they could avoid the variance process by invoking the 10% rule, however he was perhaps unaware that this property had already received the benefit of development with a variance and a permit to allow expansion (more than 10%), and that the shed was added without a permit and not-to-code. Since the Abrams reside out of state and use this property for rental income, with occasional short-term visits, it seems that they already have a reasonable use of this property. At the very least, however, it seems that it should be the determination of the hearing examiner through the variance process outlined in Ms. Bennett-Cumming's notes whether further development of the 2-bedroom house should be allowed. We hope that you take all of the above into consideration when making the decision regarding this property. If you have any questions in this regard, please contact us. Sincerel , a es Jo son Valerie J, hn n 3 PERMIT NO, ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS TAST WITHIN 300 feet Addresses are to be obtained from the Mason County Assessor's OfHc-, Building I, Second Floor, `E' 995 `��- ------------ �859 fG U WA To we s 3�� C7 aHY P-�aa save �rv�o.� C�rvi rn w A 98s 5 7A 576 -------------- (Revised 1/95)