403 EDMONDS ST.PDFIiiiiiiiiiiiii
10952
403 EDMONDS ST
9,
WE
I
TAX ACCOUNT/PARCEL NUMBER:
BUILDING PERMIT (NEW STRUCTURE):
COVENANTS (RECORDED)
CRITICAL AREAS:-0:7,01 — DETERMINATION: [—] Conditional Waiver 0 Study Required AWaiver
DISCRETIONARY PERMIT #'S:i-oj -23
DRAINAGE PLAN DATED:
PARKING AGREEMENTS DATED:
EASEMENT(S) RECORDED FOR:
PERMITS (OTHER):
PLANNING DATA CHECKLIST DATED:-7)t (
SCALED PLOT PLAN DATED: ?
SEWER LID FEE $:
SHORT PLAT FILE:
SIDE SEWER AS BUILT DATED:
SIDE SEWER PERMIT(S) #:
GEOTECH REPORT DATED:
STREET USE / ENCROACHMENT PERMIT #:
WATER METER TAP CARD DATED:
OTHER:
LID #:
LOT: BLOCK: 2
4
LATEMP\DS'Ps\Fomis\Street File Checklist.doc
9
0
PLANNING DATA
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL —>M,., ptA - k_5
I =FILE I
Name: :7��d Kne�� '��3 e_c%e(_—
Date:
Site Address: Ec4�e�,c�,A
Plan Check #: a C07 — OG:as?�,
Project Description: "�,e4,-,Ockk eX,1_S%.;Mn -GFIR,
n
Reduced Site Plan Provided: NO)
Zoning: PN tA � _1�;,
Map Page:
Corner Lot: (9) NO)
Flag Lot: (YES
Critical Areas Determination #: CRA-5��-CX_�Ok
11 Study Required
9Waiver
SEPA Determination: Ex e4,-,
0 Exempt
El Needed (for over 500 cubic yards of grading)
0 Fee 0 Checklist 0 APO List with notarized form
��q� Setbacks
StreeY, 1,5,, k
4, r e. A -. 15,,_
�:ide:
k 0.,
N &
Actual Setbacks
Street:
6N) to.,5
I C;A—
3;ffwi
jz�, (S� 7. S
Side:
I (E) � in,
NIA
XDetached Structures: C=:x%�Ek,
Rockeries: N0,r\e_!Z�kCx_oc\
El Fences/Trellises:
El Bay Windows/Projecting Modulation:
Stairs/Deck: ?,roe ur\cove,ec/�,J 0 rN Abl\.zs
6uildin Height
Datum Point:
I r\ Eo/
Datum Elevation: +
Maximum Height Allowed:
Actu al Height:
Other
Parking Required: No
Parking Provided:
Lot Area:
No
Maximum Lot Coverage: X/, -ro posed: D % \�J
L-> Jrar KJ-1- I.,:> -zore_
Lot Coverage Calculations.- :3, 6 co cft 8,0D, Zr
ADU Created: (YES 0
-Str� : V — -a 007 —
Legal Nonconforming Land Use Determination Issued: (YES
Comments
10r\ M.A. r-�,,ed 4MA
ic N-k, -,-1007 c-ed,,J'
_\oads
7.,5' n
Plan Review By: Planning Data Form 04-11-06.doc
CA File No:
Critical Areas Checklist
Site Information (soils/ topography/ hydrology/ vegetation)
1. Site Address/ Location: 40�b t;-;,r2tADND 51,
2. Property Tax Account Number: 2LD 06 10
Approximate Site Size (acres or square feet):
4. Is this site currently developed? Zyes; _ no.
If yes; how is site developed?
5. Describe the general site topography. Check all that apply.
Flat less than 5-feet elevation change over entire site.
Rolling: slopes on site generally less than 15% (a vertical rise of 10-feet over a horiz ontal
distance of 66-feet).
Hilly: slopes present on site of more than 15% and less than 30% (a vertical rise of 10-feet
over a horizontal distance of 33 to 66-fe et).
Steep: grades of greater than 30% present on site (a vertical rise of 10-feet over a horizontal
distance of less than 33-feet).
Other (please describe):
6. Site contains areas of year-round standing water: W) Approx. Depth:
Site contains areas of seasonal standing water: h C' Approx. Depth:
What season(s) of the year?
C 8!' Site is in the floodway N p floodplain of a water course.
Site contains a creek or an area where water flows across the grounds surface? Flows are year-round?
Flows are seasonal? (What time of year?
10.' Site is primarily: forested meadow shrubs, nuxed
urban landscaped (lawn, shrubs etc)
11. Obvious wetland is present on site:
----For City Staff Use Only L63Q aQ3
1. Plan Check Number, if applicable?
2. Site is Zoned? P_ M . I - 15
13. SCS mapped soil type(s)? 'k Eye4-A-�r 0 C-"VfAkV S-"�n& gt"""' o A-0 R
4. Critical Areas inventory or C.A. map indicates Critical Area on site?
5. Site within designated earth subsidence landslide hazard area? NO
DETERMINATION
STUDY REQUIRED _WA11VER
Reviewed bv. Date: I Aq
Critical Areas Checklist.doc/2.11.2004
#P20
Is
City of Edmonds
Development Services Department
Planning Division
Phone: 425.771.0220
4C. is9c�
Fax: 425.771.0221
The Critical Areas Checklist contained on this form is to
be filled out by any person preparing, a Development
Permit Application for the City of Edmonds prior to
his/her submittal of the application to the City.
The purpose of the Checklist is to enable City staff to
-determine whether any potential Critical Areas are, or
may be, present on the subject property. The information
needed to compl ' ete the Checklist should be easily
available from observations of t Lg
jftheR at
City Hall (Critical areas in bil
surveys). JAN 5 2007 1
PERMIT COUNTER
Date Received: 0 1 - 05- ';-001-
City Receipt #: 4 Y15
Critical Areas File #: C-PA - 1,00-4 - QQQ
Critical Areas Checklist Fee: $135.00
Date Mailed to Applicant:
A property owner, or his/her authorized representative,
must fill out the checklist, sign and date it, and submit it
to the City. The City will review the checklist, make a
precursory site visit, and make a detennination of the
subsequent steps necessary to complete a development
permit application.
Please submit a vicinity map, along with the signed copy
of this form to assist City staff in finding and locating the
specific piece of property described on this form. In
addition, the applicant shall include other pertinent
information (e.g. site plan, topography map, etc.) or
studies in conjunction with this Checklist to assistant staff
in completing their preliminary assessment of the site.
The undersigned applicant, and his/her/its heirs, and assigns, in consideration on the processing of the application agrees
to release, indemnify, defend and hold the City of Edmonds harmless from any and all damages, including reasonable
attorney's fees, arising from any action or infraction based in whole or part upon false, misleading, inaccurate or
incomplete information furnished by the applicant, his/her/its agents or employees.
By my signature, I certify that the information and exhibits herewith submitted are true and correct to the best o f my
knowledge and that I am authorized to file -this applica ion on the behalf of the owner as listed below.
SIGNATURE OF APPLICANVAGENtZ� '_2 �t DATE r. , 061
Property Owner's Authorization
By my signature, I certify that I have authorized the above Applicant/Agent to apply for the subject land use application,
and grant my permission for the public officials and the staff of the City of Edmonds to enter the subject property for the
purposes of inspection and posting attendant to this application.
SIGNATURE OF OWNER DATE 1-5-09
PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY
Owner/Applicant:
JWrj� -V �AVOA ��eA#N-
Name
. �5�08� 91 cve. �. e
Street Address
V,t�*\oyt, VIR, 0 Q�8
city State Zip
Telephone: li-?s: 3 �� It 8
Email address (optional): -A--A A wqk- Z) tov,%Wl - ile,A
Applicant Representative:
KAIW-42,10L
Name
SU &Wt�
Street Address
5r=bc=�fe= v 09
City State Zip
Telephone: �ZQ Ce ) 2, (o -1 t 0
Email Address (opt.ional):
APPLICATION
for
The City of Edmonds SIODE SEWER PERYaT EASEMENT No . ..........................................
NEW CONSTRUCTION 0 REPAIRS 0
114-ol85o
OWNER ........... Ge.o.r.ge R. Cole CONTRACTOR ...... ...............................................................
...... .. .. . —
..................................................................................... ............................ PERMIT No . ......................
ADDRESS ------- 9!AM9n0s .... S.t ....................................................... LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT No . .............................................. BLOCK No . ............................................
NAMEOF ADDITION .........................................................................................................................................
n
Dye Tested On Sewer 1972
Approved:
DATE................................................ By ......................................................................
The City of Edmonds Side Sewer Drawing EASEMENT NO . ............................................
214-01850 NEW CONSTRUCTION F1 REPAIRS 0 LID NO . ......... -------- ASMT. NO - ------------------
OWNER—J��--a--BRMW -------------------------------------- .............. CONTRACTOR .................................................................................... PERMIT NO . ....................
JOB ADDRESS .... AQ1Z .-S-T - ---------------------------------------------- LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT NO . ...................................... BLOCK,NO . ..................................
........................................................................................................... ......................................................
NAMEOF ADDITION ----- - ............ . ..................................................................................................
DYE TESTM ON SUAER
Approved:
00 �'
4
f
PWW-0001 -11/75 (REV.1 1178)
DATE............................................ By ---------------------------------------------------
CITY OF EDMONDS GARY HAAKENSON
121 5TH AVENUE NORTH Edmonds, WA 98020 (425) 771-0220, FAX (425) 771-0221 MAYOR
HEARING EXAMINER
RECEIVED
JUN 15 2007
IS I MEET BUILDING DEPARTMENT
FILE aTY OF EDMONDS
In the Matter of the Application of NO. V-2007-23
TERRY and KAREN DIENER FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS,
AND DECISION
For a Variance.
SUMMARY OF DECISION
The request for a" variance from th e- 15--to
ot street setback requirement of the Multiple Residential
1.5 zoning district to 7.5 feet on a portion of the subject property's border with Edmonds Street
and 10.5 feet ona portion of the subject property's border with Sprague Street is GRANTED,
subject to conditions.
SUMMARY OF RECORD
Reque :
Terry and Karen Diener (Applicants), through their representative Katherine Esser of Katherine
Esser Architecture + Design, requested a variance from the 15 foot street setback requirement of
the Multiple Residential 1.5 zone. The requested variance would reduce a portion of the Sprague
Street setback to 10.5 feet and a portion of the Edmonds Street setback to 7.5 feet. The subject
property is located at 403 Edmonds Street, Edmonds, Washington.
Hearing Date:
An open record hearing on the request. was held before the Hearing Examiner of the City of
Edmonds on May 3, 2007.
TestimoU:
At the open record hearing the following individuals presented testimony under oath:
I . Martha Pansa, Project Planner, City of Edmonds
2. Katherine Esser, Applicant's Representative
3. Al Rutledge
Findings, Conclusions, and Decision
Hearing Examinerfor City of Edmonds
Malott Variance, No. V-2006-150
Page I of 7
Incorporated August 11, 1890
Sister Citv - Hekinan. Jar)an
0
0
Exhibits:
At the open record hearing the following exhibits were admitted into the record:
Staff Report dated April 25, 2007, with the following attachments:
I . Vicinity Map
2. Site Plan, dated March 15, 2007
3. Elevation Drawings (South and West), dated March 15, 2007
4. Elevation Drawings (East and North), dated March 15, 2007
5. Applicant's Declaration, received March 15, 2007
2. Architectural rendering of remodeled residence with photograph of current residence
3. (3) Color site area photographs of residence
Upon consideration of the testimony and exhibits submitted at the open record hearing, the
Hearing Examiner enters the following Findings and Conclusions:
FINDINGS
1. The Applicants requested a variance from the 15 foot street setback requirement of the
Multiple Residential 1.5 (RM-1.5) zone along the property's northern border with
Sprague Street and its southern border with Edmonds Street. The variance request is
based on the Applicants' proposal to remodel the residence which would include the
construction of a 93-square foot balcony over an existing porch located on the west
(front) side of the single-family residence along with a 99-square foot addition on the east
(rear) side of the structure and the relocation of a bathroom on the second floor. Exhibit
1, StaffReport, page 2; Exhibit 1, Attachments 2 and 5; Testimony ofMs. Pansa.
2. 7he requested variance would reduce a porti ' on of the Sprague Street setback from 15 feet
to 10.5 feet and a portion of the Edmonds Street setback from 15 feet to 7.5 feet. The
encroachment into the required setbacks, totaling approximately -28 square feet, would be
due to a roof-eave extension necessary to provide structural integrity for the proposed
remodel. The existing footprint and height of the residence would not be altered, nor
would lot coverage be impacted. Exhibit 1, StaffReport, -page 2; Exhibit 1, Attachments
2 - 5; Exhibit 2; Testimony ofMs. Pansq, Testimony ofMs. Esser.
3. The subject property is 8,802 square feet in area. -Two structures are located on the
property - a Y ' 547 square foot single family residence is located on the western portion of
the site. and a three-story.five-unit multi -family development is located on the eastern
portion of the site.' Exhibit 1, StaffReport, Pages I and 2, Exhibit 1, Attachment 2.
1 Although there are two structures on the subject property, each has its own tax identification number. The single-
family residence is identified by Tax No. 00434202400100 and the multi -family building is identified by Tax No.
00434202400300.
Findings, Conclusions, and Decision
Heanng Examinerfor City of E&nonds
Malott Yariance, No Y-2006-150
Page 2 of 6
0 0
4. The single-family residence was constructed in 1915, prior to the City adopting its zoning
code, and encroaches into the north and south street setbacks, resulting in an existing
non -conforming structure. The City permits the continuation of non -conforming
structures so long as the structures are not changed or altered in any manner which
increases the degree of nonconformity without . approval of variance. ECDC
17.40.020(A)-(B); ECDC 20.85. 000; Exhibit 1, StaffReport, Pages I and 3-4; Exhibit 1,
Attachment 2.
5. The purpose of the RM zone, in addition to the general purposes for residential zoneS2, is
to reserve areas for a variety of housing type at a greater range of densities then found in
single-family residential, zones while still maintaining a residential environment and to
provide for additional uses which complement and are compatible with multiple
residential uses. ECDC1630.000. Both multiple dwellings and single-family dwellings
arepermitted outright in this zoning district. ECDC]630.010(A).
6. Site development standards fo ' r the RM-1.5 zone include a minimum lot area per dwelling
unit of 1,500 square feet and mmilmum street setback of 15 feet. ECDC 1630.030, Table
A.
7. Surrounding properties to the north and south are developed under the RM-1.5 zoning
standards. Properties to the east are P — Public Use (ECDC 16.80) and BD-5 -
Downtown Business Arts Corridor (ECDC 16.43) to the west.'Exhibit 1, Staff Report,
page 3; Exhibit 1, Attachment 1.
8. The Comprehensive Plan designation of the subject property is Multi Family — High
Density. The design would compliment and be compatible with the current structure and
surrounding residences and the proposal is consistent with the following Comprehensive
Plan goals and policies:
Residential Development
Policy B.2: Protect neighborhoods from incom atible additions to existing
p
buildings that do not harmonize with existing structures.
Policy B.3: Minimize - encroachment on view of existing homes by new
construction or additions to existing structures..
Policy B.4: Support retention and rehabilitation of older housing w ithin
Edmonds whenever it is economically feasible.
General Design Policies — Multiple Unit Residential
Policy C.2.c.i: The nonstructural elements of the building (such as decks, lights,
rails,) should be coordinated to carry out a unified design concept.
Exhibit 1, Staff Report, Page 4; Exhibit 1, Attachments 5 and 6; City of Edmonds,
Comprehensive Plar4 Pages 53755.
2 The general purposes for residential zones are stated in ECDC 16.00.010 and 16.10.000
Findings, Conclusions, and Decision
Hearing &aminerfor City of E&nonds
Malott Variance, No. V-2006-150 Page 3 of 6
9. The subject property is relatively flat but due to the narrow, triangular configuration of
the site (see Exhibit 1, Attachments I and 2), the application of the RM-1.5 street
setbacks to the subject property results in an unusually small building envelope for a
property of 8000+ square feet. A major portion of the existing single-family residence is
located outside of the building envelope. In order to comply with the RM-1.5 setbacks,
the single-family structure would need to be demolished. Exhibit 1, StaffReport page 4,-
Exhibit 1, Attachments I and 2; Testimony ofMs. Pansa
10. City Staff reviewed the variance application and recommended approval, subject to one
(1) condition — compliance with the plans submitted for the balcony construction and
eave encroachment project. The Applicant concurred with the City's analysis. Exhibit 1,
Staff Report, Page 5; Testimony of Ms. Pansa; Testimony of Ms. Esser.
11. No negative public comment was received on the proposed variance. Testimony of Mr.
Rutledge.
12. The City provided proper notice of the public hearing. Notice Was posted on -site and at
various public locations (City Hall, Library, etc) and, was published in the local
newspaper. Exhibit 3, Photographs,- Testimony ofMs. Pansa.
CONCLUSIONS
Jurisdiction:
The Hearing Examiner has jurisdiction to hear and decide variance requests pursuant to
Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) 20. 100.01 O(B).
Criteria for Review:
Pursuant to ECDC 20.85.010, the Hearing Examiner may not grant a variance unless the
following findings can be made:
A. Special Circumstances. That, 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. I
1. Special circumstances include the size, shape, topography, location or
surroundings of the property, public necessity as of public structures and
uses as set forth in ECDC 17.00.030 and environmental factors such as
vegetation, streams, ponds and wildlife habitats.
2. Special circumstances should not be predicated upon any factor
personal to the owner such as age or disability, extra expense which may
be necessary to comply with the zoning ordinance, the ability to secure a
scenic view, the ability to make more profitable use of the property, nor
any factor resulting from the action of the owner or any past owner of the
same property;
Findings, Conclusions, and Decision
Hearing Examinerfor City of Edmonds
Malou Variance, No. V-2006-150
Page 4 of 6
0 0
B. Special Privilege. That 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. Comprehensive Plan. That the approval of the variance will be consistent with
the comprehensive plan;
D. Zoning Ordinance. That 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. Not Detrimental. That 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. Minimum Variance. That the approved variance is the minimum necessary to
allow the owner the rights enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity with the
same zoning.
Conclusions Based on Findings
I Due to special * circumstances relating to the shape and orientation of the subject
property, strict enforcement of the street setback requirement would deprive the
owner of rights and privileges permitted to other properties in the vicinity and
within the RM-1.5 zone. The rights and privileges of property owners include a
reasonable building envelope and the ability to make minor. changes to an existing
structure. The remodel proposed by the Applicant would enhance the residence and
provide for structural integrity of the second -story modifications. Due to the
encroachment of the eaves within the street setbacks, the modifications to the residence
could not occur without a variance. Findings ofFact Nos. 1, 2, 4, 5, and 9.
2. Approval of the variance would not be a grant of special privilege. The subject
property i ' s uniquely situated with respect to application of the City's setback standards.
The single-fdraily residence has been in place since 1915, and it is legally
nonconforming. The requested variance would only slightly* *increase encroachment by
the residence's eaves within the street setback at two locations. but would otherwise
maintain the current footprint and height of the residence. Findings of Fact Nos. 1, 2, 4,
and 9.
3. The variance would be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed
modifications would be compatible with other buildings in the area, would not impact the
views of existing homes adjacent to the site, and would assist in rehabilitating the
residence. Findings of Fact Nos. 3, 5, 7, and 8.
4. The variance would. be consistent with the purposes of the zoning ordinance. The
City has stated that some of the purposes of the zoning ordinance is to protect the
character of residential uses within the City , by regulating individual parcels of land to
Findings, Conclusions, and Decision
Hearing Fkaminerfor City ofEdrnonds
Malou Yariance, No. V-2006-150 Page 5 of 6
prevent unreasonable detrimental effects and encroachment by incompatible uses. ECDC
1600.010. In addition, the zoning ordinance seeks to preserve neighborhood privacy,
views, and the residential environment. ECDC 1610.000. The variance would be
consistent with these purposes because it would maintain the existing residential
character of the neighborhood, would not have detrimental effects on surrounding
properties, and would preserve views. Findings ofFact Nos. 5, 6,
The variance would not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or
injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity and within the RM-1.5 zone.
Findings ofFact Nos. 2, 7, 10, and 11.
6. The variance would be the minimum necessary to allow the owner rights enjoyed by
other properties. The proposed modification is modest in scale, providing for structural
integrity of the alterations to the single-family residence's second story. Findings of Fact
Nos. I and 2.
DECISION
Bdsed oft-the-pre66ding Findings and Conclusions, the reque-'sit"Bo-ri --- ai'variianke' f6i-apo-r-ho-n- 'of the
required 15 foot street setback of Sprague Street to 10.5 feet and a portion of the required 15 foot
street setback Edmonds Street setback to 7.5 feet, as depicted on Exhibit I,- Attachments 2, 3, and
4, is GRANTED, subject to the following conditions:
I The Applicant shall obtain City approval of a building permit for the remodel. The
building permit may contain additional conditions.
2. This approval is subject to compliance with all applicable requirements of the
Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC). It is the responsibility of the
Applicant to ensure compliance with the provisions of the ECDC.
3. The construction project, including the balcony and eave encroachment into the
setbacks, shall comply with the site plans submitted by the Applicants as Attachments
2, 3,, and 4 to Exhibit 1.
DECIDED this 8th day of May 2007.
Toweill Rice Taylor, LLC
Hearing Examiners for the City of Edmonds
al
Findings, Conclusions, and Decision
Hearing Examinerfor City ofE&nonds
Malott Variance, No. V-2006-150
Page 6 of 6
SPRAGUE STREET
Katherine
- Esser
APPROVED AS NOTED
BY E INEERI
_gZ
Date:
CURB
K-:
GRASS
AY.".
POWER
POLE 0
C\j
"'EL
LO
REVISED STREET
SETBACKS -CITY OF
EDMONDS VARAINCE
V-2007-23
1Z
MANHOLE
(D,COVER
ELV.
100, vrozea sballbe
the
-or Perm" istiuf �Ilefl,
interprete eurTeutlY " structure
,j � -1d
�,uce of ry ';;�'mitied a' """ e of the
.8i1tten, . T t,, t - ae the w.;vr
Ut . Dutal
couformilig f w1hethar Iluch
nup'. con&jtjou wnp, �*Sq 0 �own ou the
or 01te pr -ure or
. t appucatWu, " aition is 4 5jiLact
erm, ture or w - j billmy-1
qtrut� , Ug zu., aTate
van V& --- ect Of a sey
qiteXj'tj,Du Mq b� the SUV3
con t actlon.
.,4orceinen
DRAWING INDEX
Al SITE PLAN
PROPERTY INFO.
GENERAL PROJECT INFO.
A1.1 WINDOW SCHEDULE
DOOR SCHEDULE
GENERAL BUILDING RQMNT'S
A2 FOUNDATION PLAN
A3 BASEMENT PLAN
1 st FLOOR FRAMING PLAN
A4 1 St FLOOR PLAN
2nd FLOOR FRAMING PLAN
A5 2nd FLOOR PLAN
ROOF FRAMING PLAN
A6 ROOF PLAN
A7 WEST ELEVATION
NORTH ELEVATION
A8 EAST ELEVATION
SOUTH ELEVATION
A9 BUILDING SECTION 1
BUILDING SECTION 2
A10 TYPICAL DETAILS
All TYPICAL DETAILS
Sl STRUCTURAL DETAILS
S2 STRUCTURAL DETAILS
SHEARWALL SCHEDULE
S3 STRUCTURAL NOTES
S4 STRUCTURAL NOTES
HEIGHT CALCS. _1�1
A= +1051
B= +1061
C= +105.81
D= +105,
AVG. GRADE = l05.,.y57**
MAX HEIGHT = 130, Y5*'
ACTUAL HEIGHT = 1293 (EXISTING)
TYPICAL INSULATION REQUIREMENTS:
EXTERIOR WALLS ........................ R-21 BATTS
ROOF W/ VAULTED CLG .............. R-30 RIGID
EXTERIOR GLAZING ..................... MAX.40 UA
FLOORS ABV. UNHT'D SPACE ...... R-30 RIGID
PERSCRIPTIVE WHOLE HOUSE VNTLT`N SYSTEM:
PER 303.4.1 OF WASHINGTON STATE
VENTILATION & INDOOR AIR QUALITY CODE
VENTILATION REQMNTS:
INTERMITTENT WHOLE HOUSE VENTILATION
USING EXHAUST FANS.
PROVIDE 24 HOUR CLOCK TIMER, EXHAUST
DUCTS, AND OUTDOORAIR INLETS.
SEE BATH FOR WHOLE HOUSE FAN.
ELV_,�
1051
M.
DRIVE-..
WAY
NIM
WIN
4—
BALCONY
_TBDVEfXST`G
1 st FLR. ROOF
_j
11
REMODEL
MEET "
TYPE VA CO
ISTRUCTIO
N R-3 SINGLE
FAMILY
L.Alv I Illu I - I/f_ v I vi I I
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
@ 403 EDMONDS STREET
TAX I.D. #00434202400100
NORTH
')ITE PLAN V=10'4'
TO CONNECT TO EML-,SYST.
OWNER/CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLt
FOR EROSION CONTROL AND DAMAGE
PERSCRIPTIVE HEATING SYSTEM
TOTAL LIVING AREA ........................ 2,1867 S.F.
GAS FORCED AIR MULTIPLIER ........ 27 Btu/h*ft
MAX FURNACE OUTPUT .................. 56,000 Btu
GLAZING CALCS. @ ADDITION
NEW FLOOR AREA .................... 111 S.F.
NEW GLAZING AREA ................ 10 S.F.
I
GLASS ARE LOOR ABEA .......... 9%
fk_�HEIGW/AREA CALCS FCO�—�
TYPE VA CONST. ON R-2 & R-3
APARTMENT BUILDING ........ 6,825 S.F./3 STORIES
.SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE ....... 2,705 S.FJ1 -1 /2 STORIES
TOTAL = 9,530 S.F./3 STORIES -
ALLOWABLE = 12,000 x 3 STORIES, PER TABLE 503.
NOTE: PER TABLE 704.8 UNLIMITED UNPROTECTEDr,
OPENINGS ARE PERMITTED.
b
ROOF
EXTN
DRIVEWAY'...'..
ABOVE G
1,q FLR.
-.1 IL P.L. 177.79
Y, *.
LO
C_
.8
NQ
EXISTING (3) STORY
EXISTING
(5) UNIT APT. BUILDING
blAIK6
@ 505 EDMONDS STREET
BALC.
j
TAX I.D. #00434202400300
P-2 %
'n
E VA C% TRUCTION
'A XISTING TYPE
ON R-2 APARTMENT BUILDING
DRIW
7777777lr7
66
101-011
S IDE
Zone Comer lks. SETBACK
Setbacka uired &t
A 3 BY PLANNING Front
PP Ile, Sides (a)
ar
Other'
Height
ved a reduction
LIVING AREA CALCULATIONS
BASEMENT SPACE:
451 S.F.
FIRST FLOOR:
1,158 S.F.
SECOND FLOOR:
466 S.F.
ADDT'N@2ndFLOOR:
111S.F.
TOTAL HEATED SPACE:
2,186 S.F.
IMPERVIOUS SURFACE CALCS.
EXSTG HOUSE ROOF:
1,326 S.F.
ADDTNIL HOUSE ROOF:
52 S.F.
REPLACE EXT. STEPS:
19 S.F.
EXSTG APARTMENTS:
2,127 S.F.
EXST'G BALCONIES:
293 S.F.
EXSTIG PAVED AREAS:
2,585 S.F.
TOTAL IMP. SURF:
6,402 S.F.
PRE 1977:
6,382 S.F.
POST 1977:
20 S.F.
1,�oo
w#% Note: I Ile 1�o. - - appro
in the minimum required Areet setbacks from
151 to 10.51 from the northern property lineand
from 15' to 7.5' front the southern property line.
SCOPE OF WORK
PROPERTY INFORMATION
REMODEL AND UPGRADE EXSTG SINGLE
OWNER: TERRY & KAREN DIENER
FAMILY RESIDENCE W/ BATH & BALCONY
ADDRESS: 403 EDMONDS STREET
ADDITIONS WITHIN EXST`G FOOTPRINT.
TAX I.D.#: 00434202400100
LOT COVERAGE CALCULATIONS
LOT SIZE: 8802.5 S.F.
ZONING: RM 1.5
EXST'G HOUSE FOOTPRINT: 1,180 KF.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
EXST'G APARTMENT & BALCONIES: 2,420 S.F.
LOTS 1 AND 2, BLOCK G, CITY
TOTAL LOT COVERAGE: 3,600 S.F.
OF EDMONDS, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT
3,600 S.F. / 8,802.5 S.F.= 41 %
THEREOF, RECORDED IN VOLUME 2 OF
MAX. LOT COVERAGE = 45%
PLATS PAGE 39 RECORDS OF SNOHOMISH
COUI\If�, WASHINGTON.
RESUB
AUG 3 0 2007
Architecture
+ Design
820 John Street
#202
Seattle, Washington
98109
(206)264-7780 ph.
2 4-77 x.
7204 REGISTERED
AARC C
THE INE E. ESSER
�ate of Washimton
Z
0
Lu
U
00
z
LjJ
0
o
z
Z
v)
V)
a
3:
!A
1:t
LLJ
Z
0
�t
V�
LLJ
Q
2
a
z
0
a
LLI
Z
0
LU
L.0
Cn
(=)
F
W
I-
Lu
REVISIONS
7.31.07
8.30.07
DATE:
6.15.07
PHASE:
PERMIT SUBMTT
wty
fUl4Mf)5
MID I �Wvwt-
5 1 Tb pv�-V-3
RESUB
AUG 3 0 2007
& w � M, -!,*,i I L4. k I