14-0569 Plan review comments 2 with attachments.pdfCITY OF EDMONDS ® 1215" AVENUE NORTH ® EDMONDS, WA 98020
PHONE: 425.771.0220 ® FAX: 425.771.0221 ® WEB: www.edmondswa.gov
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT: PLANNING ® BUILDING
June 16, 2014
July 2, 2014
Rhebe Greenwald
rhebeg@yahoo.com
RE: PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS #2 FOR PLAN CHECK # 2014-0569
NEW ROOF PITCH AT 23115 94TH AVE. W
Dear Mr. Turner,
I have again reviewed the above building permit application for the Planning Division. Before I
can sign off on the permit, the following information needs to be clarified in a written response
and through submittal of updated plans. Comments from July 2 are in italics:
1. House and garage: Addressed.
Are both the house and detached garage getting new roof pitches? If so, include
height calculations for the garage. In not, remove or redline the changes shown to the
garage on all sheets as appropriate.
2. Nonconforming house: After reviewing the information resubmitted on June 26 and
speaking with the Planning Manager, I cannot approve the change from a flat roof to a
5:12 pitch within the street setback area as proposed. The street setback in this case is
taken from the access easement shown on the proposed site plan (attached). All new
construction within the red hatched area I've marked up must meet required setbacks
or satisfy the allowance in Interpretation 2003-2 (attached) which identifies how
minimal maintenance on a nonconforming building roof can occur.
There seem to be several options for moving forward with replacing the existing flat
roof.
a) Seek approval of a new flat roof;
b) Seek approval of a slightly pitched new roof with an east/west ridge which obtains
positive drainage in accordance with the interpretation;
c) Seek approval of a roof with a north/south ridge which has a shallow slope within
the setback area and a greater slope to the east;
d) Apply for a variance to increase the height of the roof over the nonconforming
portion of the building to 5:12. 1 would say that staff would likely not be able to
support the request. The applicant would have to prove why there are special
circumstances involved and how the extra pitch is not a grant of special privilege.
With the other options available for reroofing the house, it would not appear to be
possible to meet these criteria. The variance code of Chapter 20.85 of the Edmonds
Community Development Code (ECDC) is summarized in Handout P86 which is
available on the City's website. Variances cost $1,662.00 plus the cost of the
Hearing Examiner's time ($500) and take between 3-4 months to process.
The existing house encroaches about 6.5' into the required street setback area from
the west access easement and so is considered to be nonconforming with respect to
that setback. New construction is normally not allowed within a required setback area
but in instances such as this, roof pitch may be increased for a flat roof within an
existing nonconforming area to create positive drainage. However, the slope within
that area must be the minimum necessary to improve drainage and no new livable
area or storage space can be created within the area. Commonly, new roof pitches
within a nonconforming portion of a structure are 1:12 or less - please describe how a
5:12 pitch roof is the minimum necessary to provide adequate drainage. Also describe
whether any new living/storage space would be created within that 6.5' portion of the
house nearest the access easement. [It should be noted that the detached garage is
also nonconforming for setbacks and so the same issue would apply if it is to be
reroofed. As shown on the Site Plan, the garage encroaches 2.5' into the north side
setback and 10' into the east rear setback.]
All referenced code sections are available here:
http://www.codepublishing.com/wa/edmonds/.
Please submit three copies of your updated site plan and two sets of any updated sheets of
the building plans. Please make all submittals to a Permit Coordinator, Monday through
Friday, 8:00 am to 4:30 pm (8:00 am to.12:00 pm on Wednesdays only). If you have any
questions, please contact me at (425) 771-0220.
Sincerely,
Mike Clugston, AICP
Associate Planner
� CS.' 4�'' ,e � it �� � � � �f ,` � E_
21
Zz-
4
ti
'oa
S*PF
'24
CUTY COPY
v 12�
C11
� CS.' 4�'' ,e � it �� � � � �f ,` � E_
21
Zz-
4
ti
'oa
S*PF
'24
---------- - ------
- -- ------ ---
October 16, 2003
Interpretations File No. 2003-2
Kathleen Taylor
Subject: Interpretation regarding maintenance of non -conforming buildings
Date Issued/Posted: OCTOBER 17, 2003
Effective Date: OCTOBER 31, 2003 (unless appealed in a timely manner)
Planning staff is currently reviewing a building permit application for roof replacement of an existing
nonconforming building. The building was originally constructed with a flat roof, which does not allow
for adequate drainage. Subsequently the roof has become damaged. The applicant would like to replace
the flat roof with a 4:12 pitched roof. The building will not exceed the allowable height of the
underlying zone.
Relevant Code Sections and Previous Interpretation:
17.40.020 Nonconforining buildings.
A. Definition. A nonconforming building is one which once met bulk zoning standards and the site
development standards applicable to its construction, but which no longer conforms to such standards
due to the enactment or amendment of the zoning ordinance of the city of Edmonds or the application of
such ordinance in the case of a structure annexed to the city.
B. Continuation. A nonconforming building may be maintained and continued, unless required to be
abated elsewhere in this chapter or section, but it may not be changed or altered in any manner which
increases the degree of nonconformity of the building.
D. Maintenance and Alterations.
1. Ordinary maintenance and repair of a nonconforming building shall be permitted.
2. Alterations which otherwise conform to the provisions of the zoning ordinance, its site
development and bulk standards, and which do not expand any nonconforming aspect of the
building, shall be permitted.
3. Alterations required by law or the order of a public agency in order to meet health and safety
regulations shall be permitted.
F. Restoration. If a nonconforming building is destroyed or is damaged in an amount equal to 50
percent or more of its replacement cost at the time of destruction, said building shall not be
reconstructed except in the conformance with provisions of the Edmonds Community Development
Code. Determination of replacement costs and the level of destruction shall be made by the building
official and shall be appealable as a staff decision under the provisions of ECDC 20.105.030.
City of Edmonds czR Planning Division
INTERPRETATION 2003-2 NON CONFORM BLDGS\16-OCT-03
L:\LIBRARY\PLANNING\ECDC INTERPREATIONS\INTERPRETA"DONS LOG\1999
Damage less than 50 percent of replacement costs may be repaired, and the building returned to its
former size, shape and lot locations as existed before the damage occurred, if, but only if, such repair
is initiated by the filing or an application for a building permit within one year of the date such
damage occurred.
16.20.030 Site development standards for Single Family Residential Zones.
16.30.030 Site development standards for Multiple Residential Zones.
16.45.020 Site development standards for the Neighborhood Business Zone.
16.50.020 Site development standards for the Community Business Zone.
16.53.020 Site development standards for the Planned Business Zone.
16.55.020 Site development standards for the Commercial Waterfront Zone.
16.60.020 Site development standards for the General Commercial Zones
16.62.020 Site development standards for the Medical Use Zone
16.75.020 Site development standards for the Master Plan Hillside Mixed -Use Zone
Code Interpretation File No. 93-4 addresses the reconstruction and restoration of nonconforming
buildings. It states that any repair of damage in excess of 50% of the value of the structure shall apply to
all types of damage, whether the damage occurs due to a sudden calamity, or due to age and dilapidation.
If the damage is due to age and dilapidation, the time of the damage for the purposes of assessing value
will be the time of application for a building permit. The value of the building shall be based on the
Assessed Value by the Snohomish County Tax Assessor. The value of repairs shall be based on fair
market labor and materials.
Analysis:
The structure in question was constructed in 1949 prior to adoption of the City of Edmonds Zoning
Regulations, so at that time there were no restrictions as to where a building could be positioned on the
lot. The applicant has requested to replace the existing roof of the detached garage. The garage will not
be demolished, and the walls of the garage will remain. In replacing the roof, its height will increase
within the setback areas, relative to the pitch of the roof.
In this type of a situation, sloping the roof is primarily for maintenance purposes. The slope should be
the minimum necessary for maintenance of the structure. There will be no change to the building
footprint, and no additional livable space is being created.
ECDC 17.40.020:13 allows the continued maintenance of nonconforming buildings, and also allows
alterations "which do not expand any nonconforming aspect of the building." Increasing the height of a
building within a non -conforming setback does increase the height of the non -conforming portion of the
building, but it does not affect the basis for its non -conformity — i.e. its intrusion into the setback. Adding
livable space (whether horizontally or vertically) within the setback would clearly increase the degree of
non -conformity. However, maintenance of the existing building without expanding its footprint or the
amount of livable space appears to be allowed under the combination of ECDC 17.40.020.D.1 and
2.THEREFORE, THE FOLLOWING INTERPRETATIONS ARE HEREBY ISSUED -
Page 2 of 3
INTERPRETATION 2003-2 NON CONFORM BLDGS\I6-OCT-03
U\LIBRARY\PLANNING\ECDC INTERPREATIONS\INTERPRETATIONS LOG\1999
MAINTENANCE MAY BE PERFORMED ON A NONCONFORMING BUILDING, PROVIDED
THAT
® THE MAINTENANCE ACTIVITY WILL NOT CREATE LIVABLE AREA THAT
CONFLICTS WITH THE EXISTING NON -CONFORMING ASPECT OF THE
BUILDING, AND
• IT WILL BE THE MINIMUM NECESSARY TO MAINTAIN THE STRUCTURE, AND
• IN ALL OTHER RESPECTS THE BUILDING WILL COMPLY WITH THE
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS OF THE UNDERLYING ZONE.
FOR EXAMPLE, ADDING TO THE PITCH OF A ROOF WITHIN A NON -CONFORMING
SETBACK MAY BE ALLOWED SO LONG AS THERE IS NO ADDITION TO LIVABLE AREA
(INCLUDING STORAGE SPACE), EITHER VERTICALLY OR HORIZONTALLY, WITHIN
THE SETBACK, AND THE ROOF PITCH IS BEING INCREASED TO ENABLE THE ROOF
TO DRAIN PROPERLY.
APPEAL PROCEDURES
Pursuant to Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Sections 20.105.010 and 20.105.020, staff
interpretations of the text of the ECDC are appealable decisions.
Should anyone wish to appeal this interpretation, a written appeal, accompanied by the required appeal
fee (see Planning Division fee handout) must be submitted within 14 calendar days of the date of
issuance of this interpretation (please see above).
The deadline for filing an appeal of this interpretation is: October 31, 2003
A written appeal must contain the following:
1) A reference to the decision being appealed.
2) The name and address of the person appealing, and his or her interest in the matter.
3) The reasons why the person appealing believes the interpretation to be inappropriate.
Concu e: Conjd �rence:
G/
Robert Chave, AICP Duane Bowman
Planning Manager Development Services Director
Posted: 1) Edmonds City Hall, 2nd Floor — Development Services Department
2) Edmonds Library
3) Edmonds Post Office
Posting Date: October 17, 2003
Page 3 of 3
INTERPRETATION 2003-2 NON CONFORM BLDGS\I6-OCT-03
L-\LIBRARY\PLANNING\ECDC INTERPREATIONSUNTERPRETATIONS LOG\1999