08-0237 Plan Review Comments1.pdf
CE
ITY OF DMONDS
PLANREVIEWCOMMENTS
PLANNINGDIVISION
425.771.0220
DATE: April 25, 2008
TO: Darryl Lewis / InterBay Properties, LLC
dlewisiphone@gmail.com
FROM: Kathleen Taylor, Associate Planner
RE: PLAN CHECK # 2008-0237
NEW SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
1139 SIERRA PLACE
On behalf of the Planning Division, I have reviewed the above building permit
application. Please submit the following:
1.Site Plan.
a.For clarification purposes only, label Sierra Place just south of property.
b.Revise the setback lines for the north, south and east property lines. The
required standard setbacks are as follows: 25’ along the south property
line, since it still fronts on Sierra Place (even though your portion has been
vacated), 25’ from the north property line and 10’ along the east and west
sides.
c.Label datum on all copies of the site plan.
d.Label covered deck(s) and covered steps/walkway to house.
e.Height calculations. See below.
2.Height Calculations. The height rectangle must be expanded to include the
covered walkway to the house. Move points A & D southward accordingly.
Then recalculate the average grade and maximum elevation. It should not be a
problem. It appears that revising the height calculations will actually increase the
average grade, thus increasing the maximum elevation. Revise the elevation view
to show the new average and maximum.
3.Placement of Proposed Residence, Etc. The proposed location for the residence
as submitted with V-2004-8 is obviously different than what you have submitted,
since the setback reduction along the north property line was denied.
However, the critical areas variance/ reasonable use exception was approved with
the condition that it is only for the proposed house location, footprint,
configuration and site alterations, including stairs, steps, driveways, and rockeries
as shown on the site plan.
To best respond to this condition, please submit a site plan showing the original
house location, etc. overlaid with the newly proposed location. I am hopeful that
it will show that the square footage impact to the critical area buffer has not
changed. If you could provide the documentation/calculations, it would be very
helpful. If the overall impact has not changed, we likely can approve the minor
changes. Also please submit in writing the reasoning for the minor changes to the
retaining wall locations.
4.Wetland Report. The list below is not intended to be all inclusive. I wanted to
point out the main items, but I will be able to provide a better review once the
complete report is submitted.
a.Missing even numbered pages.
b.Site plan attached to the report identifies the scale as 1”=30’; but when
scaling against the other site plan at 1”=20’, the dimensions are not equal.
Please revise and add lot dimensions to the site plan.
5.Grading. List the total cubic yards for removal and fill. Show on site plan. If
either number exceed 500 cubic yards, a SEPA checklist will be required.
Contact a planner to obtain the checklist and relevant materials. The review fee is
$420.
6.Affidavit. No need to change the building plans, but when an applicant proposes
a wet bar, we typically have them fill an affidavit stating that they understand they
do not have approval for an accessory dwelling unit. An accessory dwelling unit,
commonly referred to as a mother-in-law apartment, requires a separate
conditional use permit. There are size limitations. If you are interested in
knowing more about this, contact a planner. You can sign the affidavit the next
time that you are in our offices. Your signature will be notarized by one of our
staff members, and the document will be recorded with Snohomish County.
Please make all submittals to a Development Services Permit Coordinator, Monday,
Tuesday, Thursday or Friday, 8:00 am to 4:30 pm. If you have any questions, feel
free to contact me at 425.771.0220 ext 1223.