Laserfiche WebLink
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: <br />Criterion No. 1: <br />at e vaziance is necessary because of exceptional or exuaordinary <br />circumstances regarding the size, shape. topograp6y, or location of the <br />subject property; or the location of a pre-ezisting improvement on the <br />subject property that conformed to the zonieg code in effect when the <br />improvement was constructed. <br />a. Findin 'The subject property is approximately 75 feet <br />w� e by 110 feet deep for a total lot azea of 8,250 sq.fr. The <br />applicant states that the new retaining wall partially replaces <br />a woaien wall that existed toward the front of the lot. <br />b. Conclusioas:. The subject property exceeds all minimum <br />zon►ng niremenu and is not an unusually small or <br />substandard lot. The previously existing wooden wall <br />location, height or age could not be documented. <br />Criterion No. 2: <br />at the var�ance will not be materially detrimental ro the property in the <br />area of the subject property or to the City as a whole. <br />a. Fin�din_ �s•. The applicant states that the design was a joint <br />dec►sion between both the applicant and the neighbors who <br />enjoy and share the benefit of the constructed improvements. <br />During the December hearing, a question regarding the <br />retaining walls structural stability was raised by the Boazd. <br />The applicant stated that the plans had been completed by an <br />engineer and there would be no problem getting certification. <br />b. Conclusions: The Ciry provided written notice to all <br />property owners within 300 feet of the subject site. The <br />property owner to the southeast of the subject property (2517 <br />74`" Pl. SE) has raised concems regazding the 1►abil�ty for the <br />retaining wall and its stn�ctural soundness. <br />The City's Buitding Depazcment has reviewed the proposal <br />and commented that a retaining wall greater than 3 feet 6 <br />inches in height requires a building permit and must be <br />designed by a structural engineer, licensed and practicing in <br />ttte State of Washington. <br />The applicant has provided two letters regazding the <br />retaining wall's stability; One from Edwin Baker, an <br />engineer with Baker Engmeers, Inc. and one from Randy <br />