Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
SPI2010-00003 - SPI Inspections - 2/5/2010
wf STA?0, MASON COUNTY MC y DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT >° o N 2 Planning Division i� N y y P O Box 279, Shelton,WA 98684 (360)427-9670 1864 Sit!fiction + ►r> k0 February 05, 2010 :, � CINDY ARORA /9-57 o4bqe 14036 180TH AVE NE REDMOND WA 98052 ""-%t to Fga .A/40 Case No.: SP12010-00003 Parcel No.: 121195700030 Project Description: PRE INSPECTION REQUESTED TO DETERMINE BUILDABLE AREA FOR SFR Dear Applicant: Pursuant to your application, a site pre-inspection (SPI)was performed on your property. Below you will find comments made regarding the proposed development and its critical values. In some cases, setbacks for development from shorelines, steep slopes, streams, and wetlands must be included in your specific proposal; these setbacks are included as part of the comments listed below. This information is based on County and State regulations as they exist to date. These regulations may change and may affect the requirements for development of the subject property. Please contact me at(360)427-9670, ext. 360 if you have questions. Sincerely, Ndw Grace Miller Land Use Planner Mason County Planning Department Cc ; ^"d NA"ke y 2/6/2010 Page 1 of 3 SP12010-00003 ^: Site Inspection 2/5/2010 Case No.: SP12010-00003 Comments: Staff has reviewed the parcel file and the existing information completed through previous planning department actions. Staff has determined that the following setbacks currently apply to the proposed development for a single family residence on this parcel. The shoreline environment for the property within 200' of Case Inlet is Rural. The property is zoned as Rural Residential 5. In 2004, a Mason County Resource Ordinance Variance was approved by the Hearing Examiner for construction of a residence within the stream buffer of a regulated stream that flows into Case Inlet to the northwest of the building site. This variance has since expired. Currently, the Mason County Resource Ordinance stream buffer and building setbacks do not apply to development within 200' of the saltwater shoreline. Therefore, until such time that these regulations change again, only the shoreline master program setbacks from the saltwater apply to development on the site. The portion of the stream that is located within 200' of the saltwater is not regulated at this time. The minimum shoreline setback for all structures that are over 30" in height above average grade, is 25' from the ordinary high water mark (OHWM) or the top of the bank. The shoreline common line and averaging does not appear to apply because the lot is on the inside of a cove and will.not impact the views of the adjacent residences. It appears that the parcel itself may be over 25' from the OHWM. The minimum sideyard setbacks are 20' but may be allowed to a minimum of 5' with an approved administrative variance. I have enclosed an administrative variance application. The minimum frontyard setback from the road easment is 25' which may be decreased to a minimum of 10' with an approved adminstrative variance. Please keep in mind that these minimum setbacks apply to any portion of the structures that is over 30" in height above average grade, including rooflinees, decks, heat pumps, etc. You may apply for the administrative variance when you apply for your Building Permit. The maximum building height is 30' for portions of the structure within 49' of the OHWM. For all portions of the structure that are over 49'from the shoreline, the maximum building height is 35' above average grade. Because the shoreline bluff is subject to erosion and is over 10' in height, a Geotechnical Assessment or Report may be required for the proposal. Currently the Planning Department cannot require 2/5/2010 Page 2 of 3 SP12010-00003 Site Inspection 2/5/2010 Case No.: SP12010-00003 that a geotechnical report be submitted for construction within 200' of the shoreline but the Building Department may require that one be done as part of the Building Code requirements for construction of the residence within this proximity to a marine bluff. I have enclosed the Landslide Hazard Area Chapter of the Resource Ordinance with the checklist that would be submitted with the Assessment or Report because this will need to be completed prior to and submitted with the building permit application. A copy of this report will be placed in your parcel file awaiting a building permit application. Please let me know if you have any other questions. Thank you. 2/5/2010 Page 3 of 3 SP12010-00003 00003 MASON COUNTY PLANNING DEPT. PRE-INSPECTION APPLICATION PLEASE PRINT $255.00 Fee Required 1. Owner: 0i AA�=k,�.Sa n.aD 't'aro— Applicant: �SQN�Q ct S 6V_)A_0 Site Address: I ''ka sa_pc�, Sk.�l6t Applicant Address: Owner Address: - d'�`� y� City: St Zip City: St��Zip A Phone:(_) day Phone:(--'/,0,3j g F 9x / day Phone:( evening Planner: Email Address: d rd n,eoM SMP Cothp.Plan Uf Type of Use Water Body r/1A 2. Parcel No. ( 5-4 600--3 6 Parcel No. - - Legal Description:!.c& 3 O 3. Purpose of Pre-Inspection: ( Z) A,Q+Q,r Yl�✓l_2.. J)LA- ( Q b i i 4. Use of building:' 5. Do any of the following exist on or adjacent to property?: slope(x) saltwater(,C) lake ) river( ) pond( wetland( seasonal runoff l other( stream( seasonal creek Directions to Site: {' d ` Ctaw Icy d+r- a e ce s-T. If the information is incomplete, then Mason County must disclaim any errors resulting from deficiencies in the original application. Pre-inspection reports remain valid only until development changes occur in the vicinity which affect the lot evaluated in this inspection,or the laws regulating development of the site change after the time of inspection. Applicant Signature: 4Date:_t/ d -/O If you would like to be on site during inspection,please check here: Return application to: Department of Community Development,Planning Division P.O. Box 186 Shelton, WA 98584 (360)427-9670 Please include a$255 .00 check or money order payable to Mason County Treasurer When completed,this form becomes part of the parcel file. FOR OFFICE USE ONLY: Accepted by: -A", k(,,z,i". Date: MORE ON BACK SIDE ua.,;.P,�• i�nninst .02/26/2005 12:44 2538844425 WINDERMERE PAGE 03/14 Feb•25. 2005 7:59PM WINDERMEREA K IETINC• : .- . .,, No•0516 P. 2/13 • - ti - CA , n `N . WA :w ;•! y �/—•ff�� PL /jo 131 •i � jj.. T _._. -----•�._.,-,�. ram. ,,�,�,� S. x XVACK 5 ��A'i�FRQiVT • ArcIMS Viewer Page 1 of 1 s , Q r v �r = l- tl 191f http://mapmason.co.mason.wa.us/website/mason/MapFrame.htm 1/14/2010 MASON COUNTY Shelton (360)427-9670 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Belfair (360)275.4467 Planiing Eima (360)482-5269 I` Mason County".1 411 N.5th p.0.Box 279 Shelton,WA 011654 NfI August 26,2004 Tb: NOTICE OF DECISION Case:VAR2004-OW21 Do Wtp FOW. Applicant:Sarah and William Kun i Nobw is hereby given that Sarah and William Kim,who are applicants for the above referenced variance have been granted the variance.The request was approved Pursuant to*c Mason County Resource Ordinance No.77-93,specifically for the construction Of a single fay residence within a stream buffer. The proposal was exempt from SEPA review per WAC 197-11-800(1�(Q. If you have any Questions or require clarification on these issues please contact Grace Miller,Senior planner with the Mason County►Depament of Community Development at(360)427-9670,x 360. Appeal of this approval may be made to the Mason Couiity Board of County Commissioners pursuant to Title 15,the Mason County Development Code,specifically seetim 15.11.020.The fee for the above referenced appeal is$450.00+cost of transcript and should be made payable to the Mason County Treasurer.If you wish to appeal please follow the procedures outlined in Section 15.11.020 to create your own application.The application andpayment should be sent to: Meson�ouaty , Clerk of the Board Attn:Becky Rogers 411 N 5*ST Shelton,WA 98584 II o a � i M � N N N � y o •y ,r�r OO N cc A N 4 C w w � 0 0 � 0 z z aA 00 � o o O' c o 3 O N O N N N N .> 1-1 w GA h o � -d 0 0 0 � C> Please illustrate below the proposed building site in relation to critical areas (slopes, streams, lakes, wetlands, etc.) existing improvements,as well as property lines. APPLICATIONS SUBMITTED WITHOUT ADEQUATE ILUSTRATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED AND WILL BE RETURNED TO THE APPLICANT. I Departmental Review (For Office Use Only) j Planning Department Findings: i i i i i { I i i i a 1 i I i i I o � � a o 0 NC, a; W) CN E big � Vf d d 0 0 0 0 o _ C M d d 3 N a oa c N o O �p E .a 0 p c t� cc p o p U c � o z 3a� (o N � °� cco � a � � o � m cOa Q W Q .� d a n A vn cm mi c CDm' 4 o 0 a Q s U �^ a o Q, o Q v w o E' Q U 4. o y O aai M TU• V ivUi• sa .^j". '� :O 4�., bD O U ur > a�i o .0 w -. ao Q U 3 y K m O .c ° N �+ N O N b o y N y c o ° v 3 3 y E E 5 aow o c ° c o o .� o .. o c N ti .k C y UUC bUD Q o �C�. .E0 7s N EA IV- - " N .d O Q > O C O O R E o cd U p a'C3 c ° s. U A N y c A O 3 Q N U, >� :, 0, V 0 7y A ao O U vi U O N NA -0a too > c � .to a7 o Cd 3 o y c C3C, -0 E .0 0 0 o o c D y c ° °V` g N9 U U Co cbb. N " c b° E >ou N 0 to b >^ c o > o o c aUi `>> ao N E y JD 0 E A cd N = O x N.ba b vi O N a b >,� o' � aw : aE E o c $ D A at Z " `E ° C �� a '5: °;•° ; fib U 00 °c N a 3 r. 0Ou a r.� o o O U N ��' y c0 w 4•„ w. N U c C y 'b Y to a`�'i O y o" O N = "aw C Tyo c Ca a ¢ o =° � a°'i >' u Vl c 0 0 .— ea 0-U 0 Ea 'G p o a axi a v Cd U U U W) qu� � " •� ,w .0 E C •� ¢, y O c coo .: E .E o Y No a>i o N bo U N o 3 0 " .� °� •v > ° •� `E N a ►O, 0 ao o c E a t " ou -S = o a ci ob v chi }' v, En y 7 o O a a 0 0 o C*o w o p ty w .b ,�, -e 3 0 3 ca ?` ocaoo G. o � aoco� > ocw i 3 > c c a VJ Vf N p 4. U "O �.r .y Up, lC >> ! U " �d QO IL) Vl •^ S: ice. y ��O yCya N to co 0 h .0O >,'a 3 w CEO ❑ ,M Ira A4 o 1p -40 ou oc ° E0 � � ao � S N oc � v U � o oaf c 3 ° " c `� .r tg c :.. •0 ° E ° 2 x w U •v � Y 0 .6 abi b 0 o 3 :d °G w o Q c 'E ~ c ° r o u y .E Y ao O too °' c. o•:E 3 o aci w b. E 0 y � � a on b v .� v ¢ ° o y� ° cd ^ v .. ° Eb ? 0 El cw 4. c "0vx '�' � ?: y 00 � cA 3 r ai ti ° 0 3 e 0 ° ° v, •� 3 °co 5 ° v > o c� h r. OU o • ao m F � x4, P, o w ie a°oi p 0 �' 0 '� °o 04 ao �2 v, ao v°'i ° O 0 C ID U o v b o eon � 4..� c �t � Q9 � o $ •vi � W .� OOi s H o u � y Z Page 1 of 1 Kathy Soine - I need a file From: Grace Miller To: Kathy Soine Date: 1/15/2010 11:40 AM Subject: I need a file Will you please send over this file as soon as you can?Thanks 12119-57-00030 Harstine Pointe file://C:\Documents%20and%20Settings\Ks\Local%20Settings\Temp\XPgrpwise\4B 5054... 1/15/2010 �C.O « L4 n7in L 5 l.,6J - F J 4 WL I'� TOr O t� S PERMIT N .. MASON COUNTY DATE RECEIVED: --- DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT;<-f,+ "6 _ ew� RESOURCE ORDINANCE(Chapter 17.01 MCC) RECEIVED 5 411 N.5TH Street/p.0.Sox 279,Shelton, wA 985a ENVIRONMENTAL PERMIT APPLICATION JUN U 2 2001E Wit. _.CoANVIRONMENTAL PERMIT U.p ©t18 CONDITIONAL USE El426V�(RT; -The purpose of the Resource Ordinance is to protect Mason County's natural resource lands and critical areas and' the authority of Chapters 36.32,36.70A,39.34,58.17,76.09,84.33,s natural and 90.ur RCW. PLEASE PRINT IS under 1. Owner: So.rw fie.. 11 Site Address: '7 Owner Mailing Address: ) City: Sta I I Phone:Daydnw( Lien�tue fielder: S��'��-_ P-�E3ey Fire District#: Address: Signature: City;--- State: 2. Parcel Number:l a 1 '_5L- 00 3D 1 de iption. Parcel Size: SS.X 3 Directions to Site. ra 4. State what sections require a permit: Long-Term Commercial Forest,Chapter 17.10.060 ❑ In-Holding Lands,Chapter 17.01.062 ❑ Mineral Resource Lands,Chapter 17.01.066 ❑ Wetlands,Chapter 17.01.070 ❑ Aquifer Recharge Areas,Chapter ❑ Frequently Flooded Areas,Chapter 17.01.090 ❑ Erosion Hazard Areas,Chapter 01.pg80 Landslide Hazard Areas,Cha❑ pter 17.01.100 ❑ Seismic Hazard Areas,Chapter 17.01. ❑Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas,Chapter102 5. Identify current use Of property with existing improvements 17.01 10 6' Identify and describe the proposed project,including the type Of materials to be used,co dimensions and other pertinent info lion(Attach additional sheets if needed): nshuoUon methods,principle i 7 Any water on or adjacent to property:Saltwater bake ❑ River Pond Wetland ❑ Seasonal easonal Runoff i 8. Will there be an alteration of a wetland and/or wetland vegetation area? Yes ❑ No --------------------------------------- 9' If septic is located on project site,include records. Connect to septic? ❑ Community Septic? X Public Water Supply? )� Well? ❑ 10. Type of Job:• New IR Add ❑ Alt ❑ Repair ❑ P Demolition ❑ Other i This pennit is granted pursuant to the Resource Ordinance(Chapter 17.01 MCC)and no in this permit shall excuse the applicant from compliance with any other federal,state or local statutes,or ' not inconsistent with the Resource Ordinance.The pem1, ma dmances,or regulations applicable to this Project but i with the conditions of this ordinance, y rescinded Pursuant to the event the P 1 6 Permittee fails to comply � MASONMASON ENVIRO1T NALMEN USE PEPmrr: $510.00/5305.00(with anotlia pit] PERMIT:S1,225.00 MASON RESOURCE ORDINANCEVARIANCE: $1,225,00 HEARINGS EXAMINER:S350.00 REVISED: 1:1PLANNING\PAGPAC\ENViRONMENTAL PERMIT APPLICATION y Show the following on the site elan Lot Dimensions Flood Zones Existing Structures Fences Water Lines Driveways Drainage Plans Shorelines Septic System Topography Indicate Directional b Proposed Improvements Easements Y(N,S,E,W,etc.) Name if Flanking Street In relation to plot plan APPLICANT TO DRAW SITE PLAN BELOW: CALL n 0n HMp S's 5 r of Csa� D r APPLICANT TO DRAW TOPOGRAPHY BELOW: l r ao�' �w ►/A�aooy'-Doti.:�-> MASON COUNTY RESOURCE ORDINANCE May S.2M LIST OF ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 300 FEET OF YOUR PROPERTY BOUNDARIES FOR CONDITIONAL USE AND VARIANCE Addresses are to be obtained from the son County Assessor's Office,Bldg.1,Second Floor. K A C.00j,-r t AP,F. t sue. 5 k33 S St oktcc trh son C 187�t5 !�E lout►, gt & E ".A Ns� P4;,�s p. Eae �ep�r•toty� WA 9905.�.7,9A (�Itjcel 1 , WQ geoKo49 SItJ���,wP g85sy e�� 617 E ���SA Dt, �83 E L'Al. D-r_ 25 I ot. U�IIaSL �.4✓ W 4 gSS84- 3015 J1,J�a.., WA g8584 qH 15 CA ct3o1.14A 1-1, or,cs{ t.k S t V. F-c,c P1.y11;, C.Jar K coo +....p U..,a•� �j ;arcs 01 Un o� 5+ Str-�-k000 ion 53 L16s E C"pe—Ice— D� k-"wh g8loll $7g S1�JAo.,, WA g858t1 GIHII vn� Tv'AT M. Liao Sv 29SN st Ctos I w 001 t�oi►. s+ 5w , F�d�.,! w..t� W A g9o�3 W91 �ofi�J,wA g3oaI S5$$ "— aA, wo, as�rks1 c3 t Onn�L �.Qti�l �Lklirs... O.1-.►�i� yn Gros-cw� e.:l Von Ste;eel gR,x 30.�1i I�Sa H N'; tod�-A t C,,,�, '13 Pn�n�� Q:. ti+ RJ ,W P Otto s�k3A&-N i,�� wA CISSBy �. S`° Z is C,or t' e b 16�X-S S-35�►, 5i� L{65 C (,1.V�o,Pr � 4a ritorbc Ucvw-7 WA ggoo WIS 81�,�1on,Wl} q$584-C1'11l Lr VaJlc„�,PA G 1�3R 4Vn, R&- NW 439 E I+ Pow. 1� �a,3+cs D c I Mpiti,wn g85oa95�� i1,1s E M�.:n Avc—� j +., WP P� I..pJ W� gts3��31H � 9$5S4$85D !T01,t, L M,,til, y L t r t , 1a07 rvw Gu16vts-.. Dc. `4a15 121113 E 7ot►. s�lc i.JA q81'7 139q I Qr (�3i W fj CISSO-1 Tco..��I„)R R640H 7 313.0 �+� 6a:atn C./erecn rry \ $-n 1 vid Mt.dr'QvjC* /L_(pJl Q S 5E, 30", At&- r-0 E C-t esh�.krr O r> Csgo(e NE Jed pL `+",Orc a0-1oJI.Slol 61t0n) W.A C19594-w411 qft 7s I y "l.),s 47 E CX, vs tt p L Qe5 r''lolncs JT 503),Z0001 �% wed rW �.Nlctt�'I.,�UtooF.�xs �'t k;l Ftr Nq V 4 SY�[JTen r l 1A R16seq 88so &or �k�N cc� Le�� s. MASON COUNTY Shelton (360)427-9670 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 6elfair (360)275-4467 lei- Elma (360)482-5269 Mason County Oft.1 411 N.5th P.O.Box 279 Sh~,WA SIM Per the Mason Cotmty Hewing Examiner,Ruka of Practice and Procedures.Section 3.13,a motion for racoasiberation bydwHening;Exsmj=m@ybogMft& 17110 aPP must demnns"i to ere or more of the following criteria: which the moving party was prevented from bovmg a fair hearing; 1.Nowthrog Ltisc in the evilproceedingscoby with reasonable dtligenoe,bave been 2.Newly discovered evidence of a material nature that could not, produced at me beffinS element of the decision; 3.Error in the computation of the amount of damages of other monetary 4.Clear mistake as to a material fact Motiarts forreconsiderationmust be filed within 10 days of the date of this letter.Me-fee for a motion of recoosideration would inehrde Hearing Examir cost of$200.00.Please follow the procedures outlined in Section 3.13a se to o Ma for a Mottos o�f Community � payment be made out to ahourld be seat COY the Mum County Treasurer's Owen. . This is a final County decision. No fiurthar appeals to the County are available. Appeal may be made to Superior Court or the appropriate administrative Agency as mom apply. It is do appellant's responsibility to meet all legal requirements of any appeal process. N you bave questions or require eLrifigtion on tbese insures please contact t�raec Rlitef X 3�00 1 I II Homestreet Bank RECEIVED June 24,2004 J U N Z 8 2004 MCCD - PLANNING MASON COUNTY Department of Community Development Planning Mason County Bldg. 1411 N. 5th PO Box 279 Shelton,WA 98584 RE: Notice of Variance Application VAR2004-00021 To Whom It May Concern: Please find enclosed the above mentioned notice. We are unable to locate this loan on our records. Please forward directly to the homeowner. Thank you. { Sincerely, inhee Kim Loan Servicing Escrow Administration/Tax HomeStreet Bank 206.623.4616 ext.4880 800.237.3194 Enclosure LOAN SE0.YICIN6 office 1o6-623-46i6 Home Street Bank Te>>.f.ee 800-237-3194 a000 Two Union Square ii wwvv.homestreet.com 60[Union Street Seattle,WA 98101 FDIC MASON COUNTY Shelton (360)427-9670 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Belfair (360)275-4467 Pta,r,ing Elme (360)482-5269. Mason County Bldg.1 411 N.5th P.O.Box 279 Shelton,WA 90M III I I I i NOTICE OF VARIANCE APPLICATION 'VAR2004-00021 Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Area Variance Request , Regarding. Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Area Variance Request by Sarah and Ipbi Kim. Site Address: 789 Chesapeake DR,Shelton. Legal Description: Parcel No. 12119-57-00030.Harstine Pointe Div 10,Lot 30: Project Description:Construct single family residence,approximately 1900 square feet in size.Approximately 600 square feet of the footprint would occur within the 90' building setback of a Type 5 stream.It would be 78' from the stream to the closest point of the building.A Habitat Management and Mitigation Plan has been submitted for the proposal. Notice is hereby given that Sarah and Ipbi Kim have filed an application for a Variance from the building setback standards as outlined by the Mason County Resource Ordinance,Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas Chapter 17.01.110. Variances from Standards of the requirements of Chapter 17.01.110 may be considered by the County where the strict application of standards would deprive property owners of reasonable use of their property. Review of this proposal will include a Mason County Hearings Examiner public hearing to review this variance request is set for Tuesday,August 10,2004 at 1:00 PM in the Mason County Commissioners Chambers,Courthouse Building 1,411 North Fifth Street,Shelton. Written comments on this variance request should be sent to Mason County Department of Community Development,attn: Grace Miller,PO Box 279, Shelton,WA 98584. To verify meeting and hearing dates and times call(360)427-9670 ext. 360 or Planner,Rick Mraz,at ext 577. r E STAtf MASON COUNTY N. DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT o s 8 Planning Division = P O Box 279,Shelton,WA 98584 N Y y (360)427-9670 00 ?o f864 NOTIFICATION OF INCOMPLETE APPLICATION June 21, 2004 William Kim SARAH&WBWim 1317 MEDICAL DR, SUITE 3 FAYETTEVILLE NC 28304 Parcel No.: 121195700030 Project Description: Construct a single family residence within the 90' building setback of a type V stream. Residence proposed 78'from the stream. Dear Applicant: You have submitted a permit application (case no.VAR2004-00021)for opose have construction or development in the county. Upon review of your application, determined that the contents of the application are incomplete or do not provide enough detail for review. Therefore, review of your application will not proceed until the necessary information is provided (see the comment section of this letter for details.) Once the information is submitted and the application is complete, I will continue to process your application accordingly. If the additional information is not provided to the County within 180 days of this request,the application shall expire and no further action on the proposed development shall take place. { Please contact me at (360)427-9670, ext. 360 if you have questions. Sincerely, Grace Miller Land Use Planner Mason County Planning Department 1 of 2 vAR2004-00021 j 612112004 1 f NOTIFICATION OF INCOMPLETE APPLICATION Case No.: VAR2004-00021 _ 6/21/2004 Comments: The attached signature form must be mailed to the Mason County Journal immedialtly so that the application for your variance can be published in their newspaper as soon as possible. Please send the signed acceptance letter to them directly at: Mason County Journal PO Box 430 Shelton,WA 98584 CC: Mason County Journal Jeff Geibel,Windermere Realty Lee Boad, consultant 3 6►2112004 2 of 2 VAR2004-00021 1 Affidavit of Publication !1•+ STATE CoU�O MASONN� SS. �.3 first duly Sworn 7 P C rtrlP being IOr! - ,n, lit, `• ?, C1 ark on oath deposes and says that she is the a weekly ne Wpa mW asid news- of THE SHELTON-MASON COUNTY � I JOURNAL, paper is a legal newspaper and it is now and has been for more than atmooths Prior In date of the publication herein referred to.published in the Englishand it is now fodP ously as a weekly newspaper in SHELTON,Mason County,Washington. and during all of said time was printed in an office maintained at the aforesaid place of publication of said newspaper.That the said SHELTON-MASON COUNTY JOURNAL roved as a legal newspaper by the Superior Court 1 was on the 9th day of August,1941,Opp 8 agl. of said Mason County tttSld «` That the annexed is a We copy of a t Avg] Ls On LIAR 2004-00021 y Sarah and I bi Kim jby as it was published in regular issues(and not in supplement form)of said ..• Of of_ newspaper Once each week for a period of ► consecutive weeks.commencing on the nM t 2 4 th day of June 20 04 —.Sad aiding oo the hn T t n ,20 fl 4.both dates in�AOW% to[t 2 —day of red to its subscriber during ail of the said and that such newspaper was regularly distributed period.That the full amount of the fee charged for cite foregoing publication is the sum of S a ti . 4IR4 it. `� Insf1r111Ih - Subscribed and swum a before me this `` '4*MN goo+ �i _ TIInP _,2(1 (1 � ON Public in and for the State of Waahingto� M r Residing at Shelton,Washington �dgfr�4 My commission expires �4b�1�s� All w _ s RESOURCE ORDINANCE VARIANCE CHECKLIST ./ Application received an ogge�d: & / �C•� z Joy ✓ Notice and H' hV sent to WDFW and Tribe: e ° . d u.c�► 7/1� Legal notice delivered to Journal: eA l 18 (ff ,U-y!f, a,�t+"paq 5-&*� Legal notice posted and mailed: SEPA: 4/,4 Circulated on: Hearing dates: f Packets mailed to ke t % 1 Decision: �—„w,,,r,,,,� `5 sd1.c.�•ee,;/� �X y3o ,y �.etc1 J � �Z��' Notes: 'i'r,z � VacaR.fio+� (e t1/04 10 was ok fn N�,EzaM«...�! �t �' `� ..• `"cam" Cvw.� 137 HAMy DocumentsTorms and TemplateMESOURCE ORDI cz;�s-Sc c�.,I -- S1O(A ,c,.R 5e1'boc�-,rl,�ttc n w s FgoN coat, MASON COUNTY � rp Shelton (360) 427-9670 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Belfair (360) 275-4467 Planning Mason County Bldg. 1 411 N.5th Elma (360) 482-5269 _ P.O. Box 279 Shelton,WA 98584 1854 May 4,2010 Cindy Arora 14036 180 AVE NE Redmond, WA 98052 RE: SPI2010-00003 and Parcel No. 12119-57-00030 Dear Ms.Arora: The Mason County Resource Ordinance setback and buffer requirements for streams within shoreline jurisdiction have been put back in place by State law.Therefore,the stream that runs through your property once again has a 75'vegetated buffer requirement and a 90'building setback.The 90'applies to all portions of the proposed structure.The minimum shoreline setback from the saltwater to all portions of the structure is 54'.All above grade structures and appurtenances including roof overhangs,decks,heat pumps,etc. would need to be located landward of this shoreline setback.If any portions were proposed within this setback,a Shoreline Variance would be required,in addition to the Resource Ordinance Variance. These setbacks were established previously by Planner,Scott Longanecker,in 2004,within Shoreline Pre- Inspection#SP12004-00028.Planning staffs findings stated that it appears that it would be difficult to develop the subject lot without necessitating a variance from the stream and setback standards. It appears that the 90 foot stream buffer/setback encumbers the majority of the subject lot,leaving approximately 15- 25 feet in width outside of standards. Process-If you choose to apply for a Resource Ordinance Variance,the application will be processed by me,as planning staff,and I will present it to the Hearing Examiner at a Public Hearing.The hearings are normally scheduled two to three months after we receive a complete application.There is a public comment period during the process. Staff will present a staff report with a recommendation to the Hearing Examiner. The Hearing Examiner will then have 10 business days to make a Decision.His Decision may be for approval,conditional approval,denial or request additional information. I have enclosed the Variance standards from the Mason County Resource Ordinance,Development Regulations and Code with the application form. Application-An Application form is enclosed.The fees for process of a Resource Ordinance Variance with a Habitat Management Plan are$3,970.00 as indicated on the second page of the form.As part of your Variance Application,a Habitat Management Plan must be prepared by a biologist to meet the requirements within the enclosed Fish&Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas Chapter of the Resource Ordinance.I have enclosed the Resource Ordinance Variance Application form and Standards.Please note the"Review Standards,Section E"regarding the size limitations that may be requested by the applicant. With the variance application,we will need an accurate and detailed site plan.The site plan should identify the location of the stream,saltwater and required buffer and building setbacks for each,relative to the property lines and easements. You asked about the pros and cons?This is difficult to address.Hopefully once you have the application and process,you will be able to determine the direction to proceed.There is no guarantee that the variance would be approved but if it meets all of the variance standards,the hearing examiner will have more opportunity to approve it. Please let me know if you have any questions.Thank you. Sincerely, ��'� �GciCf,✓ Grace Miller,Planner DEPT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CC: David Mackie I I �rv►ot -bra 4/26/2010 y �,, Case Activity Listing ly0 31.o I go Ave Ai 10:18:19AM Case #: SPI2010-00003 • 1p, I�M67' '--) , Id Assigned Done Activity Description Date I Date 2 Date 3 Hold Disp To By Updated Updated By SPIA100 Site Inspection 1/14/2010 2/25/2004 None DONE GBM SAL 2/4 2010 GBM Scott Longanecker did the orinal pre-inspection in 2004 and I processed the variance then also.Currentlyy,regs have changed because it is on shoreline. SPIA010 Application Received 1/14/2010 1/14/2010 None DONE GMM 1/14/2010 GMM SPIA605 SPI Letter-Office Review 2/5/2010 None DONE GBM GBM 2/5/2010 GBM Staff has reviewed the parcel file and the existing information completed through previous planning department actions.Staff has determined that the following setbacks currently apply to the proposed development for a single family residence on this parcel. The shoreline environment for the property within 200'of Case Inlet is Rural.The property is zoned as Rural Residential 5.In 2004, a Mason County Resource Ordinance Variance was approved by the Hearing Examiner for construction of a residence within the stream buffer of a regulated stream that flows into Case Inlet to the northwest of the building site.This variance has since expired.Currently,the Mason County Resource Ordinance stream buffer and building setbacks do not apply to development within 200'of the saltwater shoreline.Therefore,until such time that these regulations change again,only the shoreline master program setbacks from the saltwater apply to development on the site.The portion of the stream that is located within 200'of the saltwater is not regulated at this time. The minimum shoreline setback for all structures that are over 30"in height above average grade, is 25'from the ordinary high water mark(OHWM)or the top of the bank.The shoreline common line and averaging does not appear to apply because the lot is on the inside of a cove and will not impact the views of the adjacent residences. It appears that the parcel itself may be over 25'from the OHWM.The minimum sideyard setbacks are 20' but may be allowed to a minimum of 5'with an approved administrative variance.I have enclosed an administrative variance application.The minimum frontyard setback from the road easment is 25'which may be decreased to a minimum of 10'with an approved adminstrative variance.Please keep in mind that these minimum setbacks apply to any portion of the structures that is over 30"in height above average grade,including rooflinees,decks,heat pumps,etc.You may apply for the administrative variance when you apply for your Building Permit. The maximum building height is 30'for portions of the structure within 49'of the OHWM.For all portions of the structure that are over 49'from the shoreline,the maximum building height is 35'above average grade. Because the shoreline bluff is subject to erosion and is over 10'in height,a Geotechnical Assessment or Report may be required for the proposal.Currently the Planning Department cannot require that a geotechnical report be submitted for construction within 200'of the shoreline but the Building Department may require that one be done as part of the Building Code requirements for construction of the residence within this proximity to a marine bluff.I have enclosed the Landslide Hazard Area Chapter of the Resource Ordinance with the checklist that would be submitted with the Assessment or Report because this will need to be completed prior to and submitted with the building permit application. A copy of this report will be placed in your parcel file awaiting a building permit application.Please let me know if you have any other questions.Thank you. /J10-4A&A 0fiZ000- SZ C.? 1) eA.,4W ate, r1 o t�a,�ca.,<< r.�f 9AJ 0. �� `� a Page I of 1 CaseActivity.rpt Case Activity Listing 4/26/2010 10:24:20AM Case #: SPI2004-00028 NP10 10 Assigned Done Activity Description Date 1 Date 2 Date 3 Hold Disp To By Updated Updated By SPIA600 SPI Letter-Field Review 2/25/2004 None DONE SAL 3/1/2004 SAL Pre-inspection for the Johnson's: The purposed of the pre-inspection was to evaluate issues related to possible future residential development of a vacant shoreline lot. Rural Residential 5 zoning designation. Standard building setbacks for this zoning are a 25 foot front yard setback,and 20 foot side and rear yard setback. The exception to this is for lots less than one acre and under 100 feet in width. In this case side yard setbacks are equal to 10%of the lot width,but no less than 5 feet. These setbacks are measured from above grade structures such as roof overhangs,and other appurtenances,including heat pumps etc. Front yard setbacks may be reduced to a minimum of 10 feet if necessary through an administrative variance process.Other setbacks and buffers can apply when critical areas are present such as streams,wetlands,steep slopes etc. The shoreline designation for the area is Rural. Property description: This small lot,roughly 55-feet wide by 94-99 feet deep is well vegetated with mature second growth trees and under canopy vegetation. A green belt surrounds the property on the shore side. There is an existing cleared area near the rear of the property large enough to construct a single-family residence. A small,type 5 stream runs near the West side of the property into Case Inlet. Type 5 streams are defined as seasonal,non-fish bearing streams,although the lower,tidally influenced portion of the stream likely gets some foraging,rearing use by fish,though non were observed during the site visit. The natural portion of the stream has a relatively short run due to the historic development(paving)of the area Much of the hydrology is supplied by surrounding storm water features,as well as remaining pockets of forested wetlands,which generally drain towards the shoreline and small ravine adjacent to the subject property. Per the Mason County Resource Ordinance,section 17.01.110,type 5 streams require a 75-foot vegetated buffer,plus 15-foot building setback(90-feet total)measured from the ordinary high water mark or channel migration zone,which ever is larger. Shorelines/streams: Under the Mason County Shoreline Master Program(SMP),the shoreline setback in this case would be determined by an average setback for the two adjacent homes due to the extreme curvature of the shoreline. The home to the East was measured -feet from the shoreline ordinary high water mark(OHWM),and the home to the West was measured at 41-feet from the OHWM for an average shoreline setback o 54-feet on the subject lot. All above grade structures and appurtenances including roof overhangs,decks,heat pumps etc.would need to be locatedTandward of this shoreline set ac . A grea er s-Mac cl Is required from the adjacent type 5 stream associated with the small inlet to the West of the subject property. Two measurements were taken to approximate the location of the 90-foot buffer/setback from the OHWM of the type 5 stream. It appears that the 90-foot buffer/setback encumber the majority of the subject lot,leaving only approximately 15-25 feet in width outside of the buffu I setback while adjusting for other required side yard sett ac . t appears at it would be difficult to develop the subject lot without necessitating a variance from these stream buffer and setback standards. One of the next steps to ev uating this proper-ty,however would be to develop an accurate,to scale site plan of the property with the assistance of a professional surveyor,identifying the location of the stream,shoreline and required buffer and setbacks relative to property lines. Through this process the property could be more accurately evaluated to determine whether there might be sufficient area to construct a home without requiring a variance and/or to determine how much of a variance may be needed. SI Slopes trend down towards the shoreline and stream from the front of the lot. Slopes may exceed 15%,however they are marginal in terms of requiring geological/geotechnical evaluation,because the difference in elevation is slight down to the beach area(8- 12 feet approx.). It does not appear that any geological work would be necessary,however this may be partially determined by how close to slopes a structure would be proposed. No other critical areas were identified on site. If you have any questions please feel free to call. Thank you. Page 2 of 2 CaseActivity_rpt Case Activity Listing 4/26/2010 10:24:20AM Case #: SPI2004-00028 Assigned Done Activity Description Date 1 Date 2 Date 3 Hold Disp To By Updated Updated By SPIA010 Application Received 2/12/2004 2/12/2004 None DONE TW 2/12/2004 NJP SPIA100 Site Inspection 2/12/2004 2/24/2004 None DONE GBM SAL 2/25/2004 SAL Page 1 of 2 CaseActivity..rpt • Page 1 of 2 Grace Miller - RE: property at Harstene point From: Grace Miller o4'u )(n-/4 To: Cindy Arora Subject: RE: property at Harstene point Cindy, The $445.00 fee by the County is for our review of your proposed Habitat Management Plan. You will need to hire a biologist/consultant to prepare the Habitat Management Plan for you. I will need to retrieve your parcel file for the site plan that you had submitted to determine if it will be sufficient for the variance? Ido not recall the detail given on it. I can let you know and send the variabnce criteria to you. Does that answer the questions?Thank you. Grace Miller >>> Cindy Arora <cindyarora@msn.com> 6/6/2010 3:42 PM >>> Grace, Yes, you did send me the Variance form already; Thank you. However, none of the information you have just provided is on that form. Your email has been very helpful. I have a couple more questions: *You seemed to indicate that I am expected to hire a biologist to prepare a Habitat Management Plan. I was under the impression that I included $445.00 (page 2) with my variance form for the preparation of that Habitat Management Plan. Is that not true? *And I am wondering if the site plan I sent to you for the determination of buildable area is sufficient. We have spent quite a bit of money already and feel like we have not made any forward progress. So we are reluctant to spend too much more money on more drawings until we are sure that we will be able to proceed with our design. Thanks again, Cindy Arora Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2010 10:58:59 -0700 From: Gbm@co.mason.wa.us To: cindyarora@msn.com Subject: Re: property at Harstene point Cindy, I can mail you the form and process for the Variance. I thought I had sent that to you. May I please have your mailing address again?You assumptions are correct. You will need to prove all of the variance criteria to the hearing examiner who makes the decision. You will need a site plan and I can send an example site plan. Your site plan must include all of the proposed setbacks from the stream, saltwater and the property lines and easements. It should show the dimensions and footprint of the proposed home and a building envelope for any additional uses such as lawn, walkways, parking, garage, etc. the biologist who prepares your Habitat Management Plan may be able to assist you at least with the buffers. Thank you. >>> Cindy Arora <cindyarora@msn.com> 6/3/2010 9:21 PM >>> Dear Grace Miller, You might recall that we own the property on Chesapeake Dr. in Harstene Point. We purchased this property a few years ago and are now keen to build a home there. We started the process of about:blank 6/7/2010 • Page 2 of 2 designing a home after getting your site inspection for determination of buildable area. We were in the final stages of this when we discovered that the buildable area had been reduced. I requested your opinion of our options. We received your letter, and it is quite evident that we need to file a request for variance. I am writing to you to seek your guidance on how to go about this. What I think I have understood is that our home design should not exceed 2550 square feet in footprint or 40% of the area of the lot - whichever is less. And if we are within this guideline, then there would be a pretty good chance of being granted the variance. Is that correct? Could you please advise us on the documentation required for the variance: * The form itself with a reason for variance * I assume we need to include the footprint of the proposed home * Anything else, such as a map of the setbacks? * Is there a check list that we could work off of? Thanks, Grace, for taking the time to answer our questions about our home building project. Have a blessed day, Cindy Arora about:blank 6/7/2010 ; Case Activity Listing 6/7/2010 10:37:44AM Case#: SPI2010-00003 r IP10 Assigned Done Activity Description Date 1 Date 2 Date 3 Hold Disp To By Updated Updated By SPIA100 Site Inspection 1/14/2010 2/25/2004 None DONE GBM SAL 2/4/2010 GBM Scott Longanecker did the orinal pre-inspection in 2004 and I processed the variance then also.Currentlyy,regs have changed because it is on shoreline. SPIA010 Application Received 1/14/2010 1/14/2010 None DONE GMM 1/14/2010 GMM SPIA605 SPI Letter-Office Review 2/5/2010 None DONE GBM GBM 2/5/2010 GBM Staff has reviewed the parcel file and the existing information completed through previous planning department actions.Staff has determined that the following setbacks currently apply to the proposed development for a single family residence on this parcel. The shoreline environment for the property within 209 of Case Inlet is Rural.The property is zoned as Rural Residential 5.In 2004, a Mason County Resource Ordinance Variance was approved by the Hearing Examiner for construction of a residence within the stream buffer of a regulated stream that flows into Case Inlet to the northwest of the building site.This variance has since expired. Currently,the Mason County Resource Ordinance stream buffer and building setbacks do not apply to development within 200'of the saltwater shoreline.Therefore,until such time that these regulations change again, only the shoreline master program setbacks from the saltwater apply to development on the site.The portion of the stream that is located within 200'of the saltwater is not regulated at this time. The minimum shoreline setback for all structures that are over 30"in height above average grade, is 25'from the ordinary high water mark(OHWM)or the top of the bank.The shoreline common line and averaging does not appear to apply because the lot is on the inside of a cove and will not impact the views of the adjacent residences. It appears that the parcel itself may be over 25'from the OHWM.The minimum sideyard setbacks are 20' but may be allowAed to a minimum of 5'with an approved administrative variance.I have enclosed an administrative variance application.The minimum frontyard setback from the road easment is 25'which may be decreased to a minimum of 10'with an approved adminstrative variance. Please keep in mind that these minimum setbacks apply to any portion of the structures that is over 30"in height above average grade,including rooflinees,decks,heat pumps,etc.You may apply for the administrative variance when you apply for your Building Permit. The maximum building height is 30'for portions of the structure within 49'of the OHWM.For al I portions of the structure that are over 49'from the shoreline,the maximum building height is 35'above average grade. Because the shoreline bluff is subj ect to erosion and is over Win height,a Geotechnical Assessment or Report may be required for the proposal.Currently the Planning Department cannot require that a geotechn ical report be submitted for construction within 209 of the shoreline but the Building Department may require that one be done as part of the Building Code requirements for construction of the residence within this proximity to a marine bluff.I have enclosed the Landslide Hazard Area Chapter of the Resource Ordinance with the checklist that would be submitted with the Assessment or Report because this will need to be completed prior to and submitted with the building permit application. A copy of this report will be placed in your parcel file awaiting a building permit application.Please let me know if you have any other questions.Thank you. SPIA400 Miscellaneous Action 5/4/2010 None DONE GBM GBM 5/4/2010 GBM sent letter to Cindy Arora to explain RO Variance process and application.The resource ordinance ordinance once again applied to creeks within shoreline jurisdiction.Therefore,my in-office SPI findings done this year no longer apply and a variance may be required. The setbacks revret back to those stated in Planner,Scott Longaneceket's,SPI done in 2004 and variance that I provcessed for previous owner that expired. Page 1 of 1 Casewctivity..rpt i MASON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 411 N. 5th Street/ P.O. Box 186, Shelton, WA 98584 Variance from Standards As stated in Mason County Code Title 15, Section 15.09.057.VARIANCE CRITERIA, variances from the bulk and dimension requirements of the Resource Ordinance or the Development Regulations(zoning regulations)may be allowed as follows. The County must document with written findings compliance or noncompliance with the variance criteria. The burden is on the applicant to prove that each of the following,criteria is met. Application for a variance does not guarantee approval. A variance is an application for a special "exception to the rule". The proposal must undergo public review and must meet the specific variance criteria listed below. Applicant name Telephone#(� Mailing address Site address Tax Parcel# - - Legal Description Type of Variance Requested: Mason County Resource Ordinance X Mason County Development Regulations Subdivisions and Plats On a separate piece of paper,please state your reasons for requesting a variance. In your responses,be sure to address all criteria. Your request will be evaluated based on these criteria. 1. Describe the specific modification from the terms of the Chapter required. 2. Describe the reasons for the variance. 3. No variance shall be granted unless the County makes findings of fact showing that certain circumstances exist. Please address each of the following standards and how the proposal pertains to these circumstances. a. That the strict application of the bulk, dimensional or performance standards precludes or I significantly interferes with a reasonable use of the property not otherwise prohibited by County regulations; I:\Community Development\PAC\VARIANCES\2009 Mason County Variance app..doc b. That the hardship which serves as a basis for the granting of the variance is specifically related to the property of the applicant,and is the result of unique conditions such as irregular lot shape,size,or natural features and the application of the County regulations,and not,for example, from deed restrictions or the applicant's own actions; c. That the design of the project will be compatible with other permitted activities in the area and will not cause adverse effects to adjacent properties or the environment; d. That the variance authorized does not constitute a grant of special privilege not enjoyed by the other properties in the area, and will be the minimum necessary to afford relief, e. That the public interest will suffer no substantial detrimental effect; f. No variance shall be granted unless the owner otherwise lacks a reasonable use of the land. Such variance shall be consistent with the Mason County Comprehensive Plan, Development Regulations,Resource Ordinance and other county ordinances,and with the Growth Management Act. Mere loss in value only shall not justify a variance. Signature Date Development Regulations Variance: $1,135.00 - Hearings Examiner: $2,005.00 Subdivision and Plats Variance: $1,135.00 -Hearings Examiner: $2,005.00 Resource Ordinance Variance: $1,520.00 -Hearings Examiner: $2,005.00 Habitat Management Plan: $445.00 Applicant will also be billed for all advertising costs. Updated: 12-15-2008 I:\Community Development\PAC\VARIANCES\2009 Mason County Variance app..doc f. FOR VARIANCE REQUEST Publication cost is the responsibility of the applicant. Final permit processing will not occur until advertising fees have been paid to the newspaper by the applicant. The Shelton-Mason County Journal will bill the applicant directly. I/WE understand that I/WE must sign and date the attached acknowledgment indicating and that I/WE understand that is MY/OUR responsibility. I/WE must submit the signed page as part of application in order for it to be considered as complete. DATE OWNER APPLICANT I:\Community Development\PAC\VARIANCES\2009 Mason County Variance app..doc LIST OF ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS' MAILING ADDRESSES WITHIN 300 FEET OF YOUR PROPERTY BOUNDARIES FOR VARIANCE REQUEST Addresses are to be obtained from the Mason County Assessor's Office, Bldg. 1, Second Floor. IXommunity Development\PAC\VARIANCES\2009 Mason County Variance app..doc Page 1 of 1 Kathy Soine - Re: parcel file From: Grace Miller To: Kathy Soine Date: 6/7/2010 11:18 AM Subject: Re: parcel file Will you please make a copy of the pre-inspection and site plans that they submitted for the 2010 SPI and send it to me? Cindy Arora wants a copy of the site plan to use for their resource ordinance variance application. Thanks. >>> Kathy Soine 6/7/2010 11:02 AM >>> Grace, We don't have this file. It has been scanned. K >>> Grace Miller 6/7/2010 10:39 AM >>> May I please have the parcel file foe" 12119--57-00030 Thanks. file://C:\Documents%20and%20Settings\Ks\Local%2OSettings\TempAPgrpwise\4COCD5... 6/7/2010 Show the following on the site plan Lot Dimensions Flood Zones Existing Structures Fences Water Lines Driveways Drainage Plans Shorelines Septic System Topography Indicate Directional b Proposed Improvements Easements Y(N,S,E,W,etc.) Name if Flanking Street In relation to plot plan APPLICANT TO DRAW SITE PLAN BELOW: �lei C `1 Ss 5 r rr v) �9 APPLICANT TO DRAW TOPOGRAPHY BELOW: Q-� 5 �Q Al