Loading...
2002-2 Encroachment of Decks.pdfMR!1 Date: To: From: Subject: July 5, 2002 Interpretations File No. 2002-2 Star Campbell Interpretation regarding the encroachment of decks into the common area of the Eagles Nest PRD. Date Issued/Posted: XLY 9, 2002 Effective Date: July 24, 2002 (unless appealed in a timely manner) The City has received.a Building Permit for a deck extension at 17000 73d Place West. The project is located within the Eagles Nest PRD. The proposed deck extends into the common open space and a sewer easement. The Welten Appeal (AP-99-95) found in favor of a homeowner and allowed the construction of a deck in the open space, thereby setting a precedent for future homeowners in the Eagle's Nest PRD to be able to do the same thing in regards to deck expansion. A code interpretation should clarify issues that may be raised by such proposals and establish a procedure for reviewing these proposals. File PRD-2-81 Eagles Nest PRD including the following: File AP-99-95 Elshult / Welton Appeal File, Findings, Conclusions and Decision of the Hearing Examiner (Dated August, 31, 2000) c. Hearing Examiner Conclusions (2) "It must be noted that land use regulations are in derogation of common law and operate to deprive an owner of property of an ability to use his/her property in a manner that would otherwise be lawful. If a regulation is unclear then the issue should be decided in favor of the property owner. The Eagles Nest PRD was one of if not the first PRD in the City of Edmonds and it is unclear from reading the Hearing Examiner Recommendation (Exhibit FF), the City Council minutes approving the PRD (Exhibit GG), or statements from others who were involved with the approval of the PRD (the developer, the planning manager, and the staff planner (Exhibits R, BB, & CQ) exactly what was intended relative to setbacks or constructing decks or other appurtenances in the common areas of the PRD. However, it is clear from the record that little of what was originally proposed and approved was actually constructed as proposed or approved (See Exhibits H, I,J, K, L & N). At this point it is diffucult to factually determine if a 25-foot City of Edmonds czR Planning Division EAGLESNESTDECKSINTERPRETATION.DOC\9-JUL-02 LUBRAMPLANNINGTCDC rNTERPREATIONS\INTER-PRETATIONS LOG\1999 setback was actually required, or if minor appurtenances such as decks, etc. were prohibited from being constructed in the common open space if the Homeowners Association granted approval. It is concluded that there is indeed some confusion relative to what should or should not be allowed relative to construction of decks and other appurtenances to homes in the subject PRD. Therefor, the Examiner believes some leeway should be given to the appellants in this case." (3) "The Examiner concludes that due to the lack of clarity in the intent and conditions set forth in the approving documents, the instant setback issue and the construction of the deck in the common area (which has been approved by the Homeowners Association) are not code violations." The Hearing Examiner's decision to uphold the appeal included the following conditions: The appellants shall be responsible for obtaining a building permit for the existing deck. The deck must meet the requirements of Title 19, ECDC. 2. The appellants shall be responsible for obtaining an encroachment permit. If the deck is in the way of any repairs to the sewer line that may need to be made in the future, the appellants or future owners shall remove that portion of the deck that interferes with the ability of the City to repair the sewer line. The removal and replacement of the deck shall be the responsibility of the appellants or future owners of the subject property. Analysis: In August of 2000, the Hearing Examiner heard the appeal of a staff decision that prohibited the property owners of Eagle's Nest from adding appurtanances that encroach into the common area to their homes (see above). Through the appeal record, the Hearing Examiner concluded that it is unclear exactly what was intended relative to setbacks or constructing decks or other appurtenances in the common areas of the PRD. Also, it is difficult to factually deten-nine if minor apprurtenances such as decks were prohibited from being constructed in the common space if the Homeowners Association granted approval. So, the Hearing Examiner made a decision that resulted in allowing a homeowner of the Eagle's Nest PRD to build a deck that encroached into the common area and a sewer easement With this decision, a precendent was set which will allow other Eagle's Nest PRD homeowners to also construct decks that encroach into the common area (and potentially into easements), as long as the applicant obtains permission from the Homeowners Association and obtains an encroachment permit (if necessary). This is based on the assumption that the proposed deck will otherwise meet the requirements of the City of Edmonds Community Development Code. I THEREFORE, THE FOLLOWING INTERPRETATIONS ARE HEREBY ISSUED: In the Eagle's Nest PRD, appurtenances shall be allowed to cross property lines and encroach into the common area if certain conditions are met. The following conditions have been established in order to protect the intent of the original PRD, ensure public safety, and to establish clear standards for reviewing future proposals: 1. This interpretation shall apply only to properties within the Eagle's Nest PRD and shall not be applicable to proposals in other PRD's. Page 2 of 3 EAGLESNESTDECKSINTERPP,ETATION.DOC\S-JUL-02 L:\L1BPARY\PLANNfNG\ECDC rNTERPREATIONSUNTERPRETATIONS LOG\1999 2. Future proposals to build an appurtenance that encroaches into the common area of the Eagle's Nest PRD must include the following items with the submittal of the Building Permit application for the project in addition to those items that are normally required for the submittal of a building permit: 0 A letter from the Eagle's Nest Homeowners Association stating approval of the proposed project. 3. If the proposed project encroaches into a utility easement, an encroachment permit will be required. 4. Future approvals of Encroachment Permits for decks extending over a sewer easement should include the following condition which was a condition of approval of AP-99-95: If the deck is in the way of any repairs to the sewer line that may need to be made in the future, the owners or future owners shall remove that portion of the deck that interferes with the ability of the City to repair the sewer line. The removal and replacement of the deck shall be the responsibility of the owners or future owners of the subject property. 5. "Appurtenances" are interpreted to include the following: decks, stairs, patios, and garden windows. 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 fee (see Planning Division fee handout) must be issuance of this interpretation (please see above). written appeal, accompanied by the required appeal submitted within 14 calendar days of the date of The deadline for filing an appeal of this interpretation is: 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. Concurrence: Conckirrence: Robert Chave, AICP Duane Bowman Planning Manager Development Services Director Posted: 1) Edmonds City Hall, 2 d Floor — Development Services Department 2) Edmonds Library 3) Edmonds Post Office Posting Date: Page 3 of 3 EAGLESNESTDECKSTNTERPR-ETATION.DOC\5-JUL-02 L \L1BRARY\PLANNFNG\ECDC INTER-PREATIONSUNTERPRETATIONS LOG\1999