BLD20131254 Plan Review Comments - 2nd Review.pdf
CE
ITY OF DMONDS
th
•1215AN•E,WA98020
VENUE ORTH DMONDS
P: 425.771.0220 • F: 425.771.0221 • W:www.edmondswa.gov
HONEAXEB
DSD:P•E•B
EVELOPMENT ERVICES EPARTMENTLANNING NGINEERING UILDING
February 12, 2014
Mr.and Mrs. Jackson
Email: Nikki.ActionJackson@yahoo.com
ND
RE: 2PLAN REVIEW COMMENTSFOR PLANCHECK #BLD20131254
TH
JACKSON GARAGELOCATED AT 23814–84AVE. W
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Jackson:
th
I have reviewed your January 28resubmittal for the above building permit applicationfor the Planning
Division,and it was found that the following information, corrections, or clarifications will need to be
addressedbefore review can continue:
Lean-To:
1.Your revised site plan and building plans indicate a lean-to on the westernside of the
garage. Please address the following comments regarding the proposed lean-to:
a.The northern and southern sides of the lean-to areindicated on the site plan as being at an angle
from the northern and southern sides of the garage. Please confirm if this is correct or if the
northern and southern sides of the lean-to are actually in line with the sides of the garage.
Reviseany inaccuracies on the site plan.
b.Please indicate the proposed dimensions of the lean-to on both the site plan and the building
plans.
c.The area of the lean-to must be added to the impervious surface calculations.
th
Western Engineers:
2.Your response submitted on January 28states “see attached from Western
Engineers”; however, no correspondence from Western Engineers was attached with the
resubmittal. An email andsurvey was sent to staff byWestern Engineers on April 25, 2013, so it is
unclear if these are the materials you are referring to, or if you had planned on submitting additional
information from Western Engineers.Please provide the materials from Western Engineers that
you referenced in your resubmittal and address the following:
a.The height calculations provided on your site plan are inconsistent with those indicated on the
survey by Western Engineers dated April 2013(emailed to staff by Western Engineers on April
25, 2013).Please correct any discrepancies.
b.The survey by Western Engineers dated April 2013 indicates that the garage is 16.5 feetfrom
the western property line; however, this is inconsistent with the dimensions indicated on your
site plan. Please utilize the survey by Western Engineers to ensure that the dimensions
indicated on your site plan are accurately depicted. The lean-to was not indicated on the
survey, butthat will need to be included to scale on your site plan.
Setbacks:
3.Your revised site plan indicates that the garage/lean-to structure is proposed to be 5.2
feet from the rear (western)property line. The code requires a minimum rear setback of 15 feet,
which may be reduced to 5 feetfor detached accessory structures with a footprint of less than 600
square feet.As requested above, please provide the dimensions of the proposed lean-to. If the
footprint of the lean-to and garage together exceeds 600 square feet, the structure would need to be
a minimum of 15 feetinstead of 5 feet from the rear (western) property line.
12
Page of
Height:
4.Please address the following comments regarding the height of the proposed garageand
lean-to:
a.The height rectangle indicated on your site plan must include the lean-to. Please revise the
locations of Points A and D so that they encompass the lean-to and revise the elevations of
these points as necessary to reflect theelevations of their corrected locations.
b.As discussed above, please ensure that the height calculations are consistent with those
indicated on the April 2013 survey by Western Engineers, keeping in mind that the elevations
of Points A and D willneed to be revised to reflect their locations further west in order to
encompass the lean-to.
c.Revise the elevations of the average original grade and maximum permitted heightas necessary
to reflect the corrections to the locations/elevations of the four corners of the height rectangle
discussed above. Provide theproposed elevation of the garage/lean-to roof once it is reduced to
a flat roof.
d.Indicate the elevations of the average grade, maximum allowed height, and proposed height on
building elevationviews in addition to on the site plan. Refer to Handout #B41 for guidance.
Lot Coverage:
5.Lot coverage is defined as the total ground coverageof all buildings or structures
on a site measured from the outside of external walls or supporting members or from a point two
and one-half feet in from the outside edge of a cantilevered roof, whichever covers the greatest
area. The maximum allowed lot coverage for the RS-8 zone is 35 percent of the net lot area.
Thank you for indicating lot coverage on your site plan; however, it is unclear what was included
when calculating the proposed lot coverage.Please provide a breakdown of the lot coverage
calculations (separate from the impervious surface calculations) and indicate the areas of the
footprints of the proposed garage and lean-to as well as the areas of the footprints of the existing
residence, covered front porch, and the temporary and permanent wood porches (if they are covered
or if they are uncovered and more than 3 feet in height).Please indicate the proposed lot coverage
in square feet and calculated as a percentage of the net lot area.
Please submit three copies of your revised site plan (including one reduced copy) and two copies of any
revised building plan sheets to a Development Services Permit Coordinator. Our office hours are
Mondays, Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Fridays between 8:00 am and 4:30 pm, and Wednesdays between
8:00 am and noon.
If you have any questions, feel freeto contact me at (425) 771-0220.
Sincerely,
Development Services Department -Planning Division
JenMachuga,
Associate Planner
22
Page of