Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
09-102236
FILE , Nih, CITY OF CITY HALL Fed e ra I Way 33325 8th Avenue South Mailing Address: PO Box 9718 Federal Way,WA 98063-9718 (253)835-7000 www.cityoffederalway.corn August 11, 2009 David Toyer Toyer Consulting 1208 113th Avenue SE Lake Stevens, WA 98258 RE: FILE#09-102236-00-UP;RESPONSE TO INQUIRY Therma Fisher Scientific Building, 822 South 333"1 Street, Federal Way Dear Mr. Toyer: The following letter is provided in response to your request for information dated June 16, 2009. The building in question is a 25,136 square-foot masonry building constructed in 1987 under King County. The building is located on a 1.87-acre property that is located in the OP (Office Park) zoning district. This district permits a number of uses.' City business licenses for the property were issued in 1998 for the business that consisted of"distribution of lab supplies."Your June 16, 2009,letter notes that the use of the building has not changed since its permitting, construction and original occupancy in 1987, with approximately 5,000 SF used as office and 20,000 SF used as warehousing/distribution. Federal Way Revised Code(FWRC) 19.235.030,note#5 states that the city may allow an accessory warehouse facility if it complies with criteria (a) through (e). Criteria(a)indicates that the warehouse is accessory to the primary use on the subject property and occupies no more than 50%of the combined gross floor area of this use and the primary use. Your questions are repeated below in bold with responses following: 1. 19.30.030-Confirmation that the subject parcel is a legal nonconforming use and may continue as allowed by FWRC 19.30.030. Response: The city has limited information about this building as it was constructed before the city incorporated and we have no records of it other than a business license for the distribution of lab supplies, and storm drainage maintenance records. While the City has no records that indicate that the building is a nonconforming structure, your letter notes that the current building use is one-quarter office and three-quarters warehouse. or 75 percent warehouse. That exceeds the ratio of warehouse to office use permitted in the OP zone under FWRC 19.235.030,note 5, criteria(a), stated above. Under FWRC 19.30.030,if the building was constructed with proper permits wider King County, it is considered grandfathered to that previous code until such time as proposed changes to the property trigger adjustment of the nonconforming element(s)into compliance with current code. Therefore, the city considers the current use to be a legally nonconforming use. I Zoning for the site was established as OP on February 28, 1990,the date the City incorporated.It was designated as M-P under King County. viiVbIPM-41.4yer -3 August 11,2009 Page 2 2. 19.30.080 -Clarification of what constitutes "normal maintenance" as referred to within FWRC 19.30.080(1)(b). Does normal maintenance include tenant improvements? Do tenant improvements fall under the restrictions on alterations to no more than 15% of the appraised value in any one consecutive 12 month period? Response: Definitions in FWRC 19.05.140 state that normal maintenance includes interior and exterior repairs and incidental alterations. Normal maintenance and repair includes,but is not limited to painting,roof repair and replacement,plumbing, wiring and electrical systems, mechanical equipment replacement and weatherization. Incidental alterations include construction of nonbearing walls or partitions. Under FWRC 19.05.200, tenant improvements means any work, improvement or remodeling completely within the interior of a building necessary to meet the varied requirements of continuing or succeeding tenants. The terms are not mutually exclusive. Normal maintenance may include items that are consistent with tenant improvements such as painting. Any portion of a TI that meets the definition of normal maintenance is exempt from the 15%threshold. Conversely, any portion that does not meet the definition of normal maintenance is subject to the 15%threshold. 3. 19.30.090-Under 19.30.090(a), what conditions would constitute a change of use and what are some specific examples that show how the criteria in 19.05.030 have been applied? Response: Under FWRC 19.05.030, conditions that constitute a change of use include where the general character of a use has been modified and includes review of(1)Hours of operation; (2) Required parking; (3) Traffic generation; (4) General appearance; (5) Type, extent or amount of indoor or outdoor storage; and(6) Constituents of surface water discharge or runoff. Some specific examples that have been determined to meet the definition of a change of use are changes from retail use to a restaurant use,residential building to an office use, or a retail use to a manufacturing use. 4. What conditions or circumstances may trigger the city viewing the existing and legally nonconforming use of the 25,000 square-foot warehouse/distribution facility as having undergone a change of use? Response: To determine if a change of use has occurred, the city would have to conduct a formal change of use analysis, which involves review of the impacts of the existing or approved use as compared with a new use, using the criteria in FWRC 19.30.090 Change of Use. The applicant would be required to provide information to document existing and proposed uses. This question is too broad to answer without a specific proposal to evaluate. 5. Specific to previous question, does the city have any thresholds that it has used or would use to determine how it would interpret a change of use based on a change to the "type,extent or amount of indoor or outdoor storage" as described under criteria (5)in the definition for change of use? For example, if a future tenant was to increase its office area and reduce the size of its warehouse/distribution area but continue to operate as a warehouse/distribution facility, would that qualify as a change of use? Response:Any use in the building must comply with the original uses approved under King County unless the applicant requests a change of use from that previously approved and meets Federal Way code standards for the OP zone. The change you describe would not change the use and would not increase the nonconformance of the use, and would thus be allowed. 09-102236 Doc LD.S057E Mr. David Toyer August 11,2009 Page 3 6. Under 19.30.090(e), how does the city define cessation of a use? For example, is tenant vacancy considered cessation of a use if the vacancy lasts longer than one year? Or is cessation of use under subsection (e)similar to that of subsection (d), abandonment? Response:A use will be considered to have ceased when the business license has been closed(or the renewal returned as undeliverable), or if the fire depa,tment notes in annual inspections that the tenant has moved out.Abandonment means that the owner has ceased paying property taxes. A tenant vacancy longer than one year does not necessarily constitute a cessation of that use in a building unless it is a single tenant building. Under FWRC 19.30.090(3),when the use has ceased on a single tenant building for more than one year and a new use occupies the building, the applicant must repair and/or restore the improvements on the site to a condition as near physically possible to the condition required by requirements of approval of the original development. 7. Applicability-What is the difference in circumstance between the applicability of 19.30.080 versus 19.30.090 as it relates to the situation,property and structure in question? For example, tenant improvements would not appear to trigger 19.30.090, but appear to trigger 19.30.080 if they are more than 15% of the current or appraised value of the structure. What specific provisions of code are applicable to this parcel and its status? Response: FWRC 19.30.080 deals with the use occupying the building while 19.30.090 FWRC deals with the development features, including building height, setbacks,required parking, landscape buffers and interior parking lot landscaping, etc. 8. What sections of code should my client reference in order to continue to maintain the existing and legal non-conforming use of warehouse/distribution at this location? Response: FWRC sections on non-conformance and the zone use charts. 9. Please provide any additional information that may be helpful to my client in maintaining the existing and legal non-conforming use of the property as warehouse/distribution. Response:Your client should obtain the land use decision for the property to quantify the amount of warehouse space versus the office space approved under King County. The building permit you provided does not include that detail. Unfortunately, without a specific use reference or condition, and lacking the original King County land use decision, the City of Federal Way responses to your questions are generic. This letter is not considered an interpretation as the questions that you have asked are not questions that require an interpretation. The questions are simply clarifying questions about code applicability. I do hope that this letter resolves your client's questions. I regret that my workload resulted in a delay in getting you this information. I can be reached at 253-835-2642 or at deb.barker@cityoffederalway.com if you wish to discuss this letter. Please note that I will be out of the office from August 13 through September 7, 2009. In my absence, please contact Planning Manager Isaac Conlen at 253-835-2643 or Isaac.conlen@cityoffederalway.com. Sincerely, Deb Barker Senior Planner 09-102236 Doc.LD.5O571t RECEIVE ASTER LAND USE APPLICATION DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 33325 8th Avenue South CITY OF .. PO Box 9718 Fed e ra I VVayJUN 1 6 ��; � Federal Way WA 98063-9718 CITY O F FEDERAL WAY 253-835-2607t Fax 253-835-2609 lway.com www.cityoffederalway.com CDS f� / APPLICATION NO(S) V /022 7736, v v (> Date (0 1 1 b 109 Project Name Cow CEKIT e i C- 2 Property Address/Location 8 2 2 S. 3 3 5T` mop ci2lF L L✓�4..i u7, e pj op 3 Parcel Number(s) 92 65 000 i6.0 t , Project Description IZECrtt tErr fb(1 4-0 rN t•`rt2,4r-rt LE, C jE I r•rrra4e s 710, t DEC- J ft. 6 'r+FE A.499i-tcAeno03 OF Trr tR•30 NotsCOARilew1A-n1 CE "T0 1441-C.EI- q a-0)5000I bD• PLEASE PRINT Type of Permit Required Applicant Annexation Binding Site Plan Boundary Line Adjustment Name: C o N Z CE+•-rr zi G Comp Plan/Rezone Address: 284 I E.LK 5-34 ,w4r., .J+( PIG NE Land Surface Modification City/State: SA-AA.N okwt S{� w.4 98074 Lot Line Elimination Zip: Preapplication Conference Phone: )( Process I(Director=s Approval) Fax: Process II(Site Plan Review) Email: Process III(Project Approval) Signature: Process IV(Hearing Examiner's Decision) Process V(Quasi-Judicial Rezone) Agent(if different than Applicant) Process VI SEPA w/Project Name: 'DP.V 11 CCrJJIALT Nor SEPA Only Address: 1209 - 1 134 cE Shoreline: Variance/Conditional Use City/State: a. sirver.45, WA gg2.58 Short Subdivision Zip: Subdivision Phone: q.25-34i_ 15 23 Variance: Commercial/Residential Fax: Email: jovfletw,5, eO..0. care Signatures / Required Information Owner 0P_ Zoning Designation De Comprehensive Plan Designation Name: 54 �C (t- Cq�-� 2 Address: 4 4 r►.•• I Value of Existing Improvements City/State: '"/1A Value of Proposed Improvements Zip: Phone: International Building Code(IBC): Fax: t, F,CoYPIh aC(A-(.IWs# + tSOccupancy Type Email Signature: � _41014soN- y Construction Typeif C‘ u,,,. Bulletin#003-August 18,2004 Page 1 of 1 k:\Handouts\Master Land Use Application • ..- , RCRA Contingency 1 Attachment'I Site Plan \ • E .MERGENCY EXITING.OF WAREHOUSE ------- ----- .— & OFFICE -- - -. • , ... •, . ., ."-- • , ..er- • - . . _ - . - 1Z7 - ..; e s • ....,........—...,__J- •‘. . C••• .100:—•. A01) •. i . t . •. 'Aler . • • \ , 1 .1:- • k710 . 11.."• 1 1'/_..pt,' \.P?':‹41 • I . . '::f:r •V• . --':-' • ..:• _ - / .. • . , -'. - z • • -• • ' I .fr:. • z, .. — . to- i ,V, zit. • Alf AZ * . .P • ./.. i . • .: ...• . v., \ . ... ; • V.V. -- , .'.•..t . • . rs., 0 e .1 ' , 1 I • ;..L. . /\. .. 0/e. • ‘, •:Ir. 0 . . ..."4-te.. • • ' I . / . • ,4 . „. ....... , - o ../ .. . • • , r f . , • .' .0. • . • r. . . . . Pal Cx,111.4Aki , 1 \ '4. •-. , A: •- •• •..'PA . '• ..e'-5-t- • 1 -..... N .• 1 ti) - 12" ,./";.',.? 44. • . N s i Z.. i d , , --N.• (--4;4." i.j(" .. :\ --•-e• ../..' 1 .. s. n, \ .4•e- ,,. , •• \ X t? s• .• </K1/4/\ - • ' •' ': ...1... •• . . 4. \ , . \‘• 3\ - • -) , .. st •. seci s. `.<1r,.4r3 , ,,,,N _ 4- • . ..v .,, 7.‘N. .1_4-•' ' 4,' . . • •. . ., , '' '•'.. .:/ -. - . . - .)--- . •..,. 0 '--,, z. ' N . • ..-$.0.. -, ,/ .X•.: N<,),./k . i ••=••:': .;”',• 4-/ ...2 . • .'---- t•:•*-r-, .*. xi-fr .• ,-N. / • ., X ".. 4. <;...7.• / 1 ../ ,0- •• • As „ . Vil:. ' V.V • N ..• ..del • •I :.N.. f... "•• . N \ .. -• SC- • ‘1•• .: .. • ;:Cz ( . ''••;... - • .. --.-- ,'- ...c • . L • _:k: \ .1 ,• -• 4; .•ki:re:t.".* 1 C .0 `,.../...0.- % . .0‘ •7, j '. .. '1.-j• • \ . 9r.' ' , .' <.k j 4;t:•• .. 4-'.• " \ . , :.\. — ....-' _,..- .--..„. • ••• \ • , • ' . •:‘. l'k,•''''. , `,..• '4 -. Cr.'''. i , • . / . ... • A. .. „ .- .• • .s4- I \ \ •• . .• '. Al- ss .. a .....- ... ...- .-•* 4 \ - . ...• 5 . . . ..--. • 1. //.../,..e c: -6.rt -:;•,•.-f5 \ • • ' . \• .. •‘4 ti,4. r•.1-17_t.K. 0 . .1 --- •1 -;71'21.-- '\X --"/ . t • • : 1. • i - Also see next page for more detail..... 0 • . , - Created: DECEMBER 1999 APX 4-1 , Revised:March 16,2004 t r ' Seattle CountyREALTORS0 12410 SE 32nd Street, Suite 100, Bellevue,WA 98005 (425) 974-1011 • TF: (800) 540-3277 • Fax: 425-974-1032 EALTOR° TO: City of Federal Way Planning Commission Chairman Merle Pfeifer& Commissioners Hope Elder(Vice Chair), Lawson Bronson, Wayne Carlson, Tom Medhurst, Sarady Long and Tim O'Neil, DELIVERY: do: Margaret Clark, Senior Planner, (253) 835-2646, guargaret.cla.rk. citvotTederalway.com Tina Piety, Administrative Assistant II, (253) 835-2601 tina.Diet y(a)eiti ollederaalway.coin Deb Barker, Senior Planner; and d eb,,b arkeriesityoffederalway.coon FROM: Sam Pace, Housing Specialist, SeattleKing County REALTORS® DATE: July 20,2009 RE: Plat and Land Use Application and Permit Time Limit Extensions Dear Chairman Pfeifer and Members of the Planning Commission: My name is Sam Pace. I'm a Housing Specialist with the Seattle-King County Association of REALTORS®and I'm writing to you on behalf of our 7,500+members. I will be unable to attend the July 22nd Planning Commission meeting to testify at the Commission's Public Hearing on Plat and Land Use Application and Permit Time Limit Extensions. I'm out-of-town on vacation with my family,but this issue of such importance I thought it necessary to provide you written comments on the subject. I request that these be made a part of the Public Hearing Record. I provided similar written comments to the City Council back in March 2009. Since that time, several other cities, as well as the King County Council, have already enacted extension ordinances. I want to share with you our Association's support for(and underscore the importance of) the City adopting a Local Economic Stimulus plan. One key piece of such a stimulus plan that we request the City adopt is Extending the life of plat and land use applications and permits (and especially "short plats")including those that were in the City's permitting pipeline on or after January 1, 2008. We recommend extending the life of short plats to seven years, (or at least to five years plus annual one-year extensions after the fifth year, similar to the way the City currently treats subdivisions and building permits). Seven years, like the King County Council adopted(retroactive to 2004) is the preferred approach As you know, consistent with existing state law, the City allows 9-lot short plats, and deserves credit and recognition for doing so. In addition, the City allows permits for subdivisions and buildings to be valid for five years,plus annual renewals beyond the fifth year. The City's deserves credit for this approach as well. It is appropriate for the City to provide time frames for the validity of short plats that are similar to those the City provides for subdivisions and building permits. We recommend seven years. ' r TO: Chairman Merle Pfeifer and'Members of the Federal Way Planning Commission DELIVERY: c/o Margaret Clark,Tina Piety and Deb Barker FROM: Sam Pace,Housing Specialist,SeattleKing County REALTORS® DATE: July 20,2009 RE: Plat and Land Use Application and Permit Time Limit Extensions PAGE: 2 of 3 As you also know, the construction of homes and plats is stalled due to the national(and world) financial crisis that is dramatically constricting access to the capital needed to complete construction of plats and homes. That financial crisis is not the fault of local builders/property owners who find themselves in the position of unintended victims (like so many other small to medium-sized businesses in our local communities). It is important that the City extend the life of those plats (and especially"short plats") and permits, rather than allowing them to expire. Allowing them to expire, and requiring builders to re-do,re-submit, and re-pay for work that has already been done, and already submitted to the City: • Increases the Costs of Housing • Hurts Housing Affordability for working families • Places homebuilders (and the jobs they provide for local workers)in greater peril. Some observers of the industry indicate that perhaps as many as half the firms may not be able to survive the current financial crisis. • Allowing the permits/applications to expire also has the potential to divert City resources for review of other projects -such as construction the Council wants to see happen Downtown-to redo staff work on residential projects once the market begins to recover; and • All of that, in-turn, delays the City's receipt of sales tax on"sticks and bricks"used in construction of plats and homes, as well as REET revenues the City receives when the lots and homes sell. Additionally,viewing this situation from a"macro economics"perspective, I anticipate that when credit markets start to recover and builders once again have access to capital, we're going to see a continued constraint on housing supply(relative to the pent-up demand for homes)that will artificially increase housing prices above more normal market levels. While it may seem counter-intuitive given current inventory levels, this imbalance between supply and pent-up demand will be the result of the "lag time" between the remaining/surviving builders regaining access to credit for working capital, and the time it takes to complete construction of the plats and homes. Importantly, and unfortunately, there are likely to be far fewer builders available to meet that demand, resulting in longer lag times and higher price increases. Depending upon the number of construction firms that go under, I anticipate this will happen for a period of about 6 to 18 months while the construction industry once again begins building homes that, when finished, will be sold to the families of local workers. It's important for the City to do its small part to help avoid unnecessarily exacerbating that imbalance between supply and pent-up demand when the market starts to recover. Extending the life of plats (and especially"short plats"which currently receive disparate treatment) is an important contribution the City can make to help mitigate this problem. Making the extensions retroactive for projects that were in the City's pipeline on or after January 1, 2008, (or even 2007, when many construction firms began to experience the lenders' constricting access to working capital) will help to mitigate the damage being done, and avoid future damage. TO: Chairman Merle.heifer and'Members of the Federal Way Planning Comm.,sion DELIVERY: do Margaret Clark,Tina Piety and Deb Barker FROM: Sam Pace,Housing Specialist,SeattleKing County REALTORS® DATE: July 20,2009 RE: Plat and Land Use Application and Permit Time Limit Extensions PAGE: 2 of 3 A very recent study by a number of noted economists and researchers in our state found that Housing (both directly and indirectly) accounts for approximately 20%of the State's GDP and 24% of the payroll in Washington State. Additionally, each 1,000 home sales result in 935 jobs, $37.5 million in wages and $126 million in economic activity. It's an important economic driver for our economy. Thank you in advance for your consideration. Sincerely, SEATTLEKING COUNTY REALTORS® SAO% paw Sam Pace, Housing Specialist cc: David Crowell SKCAR Governmental Affairs Committee EMEI �NCY EVACUATION 1sher Scientific 822 S. 333r1 Street/253.874.4400 42\ `L/1 14 i enter rp OE 0 z • dock I area 4 1 v : \-\ \ main_ © work hat.woste .31e.0 refrigerator NQ EXIT K�s��urety -.lasrc!• chemical storage flammable© ® fnd ® elec. Otstorage_ © U la-2/ to 1. O waste tel. -fin t INIIIIM c..WIMP 1 lunch patio �� patio © doom S.nmmun, �meti . ..e s.® tenter enter D © �'w © exit n ® fire extinguisher OFFICES `J . k° ©gni -ZIA enter �� • b� meet h re i SIGN I ( i '"'" you then gather in front of the building at the FISHER sign. •a" To evacuate,choose the exit nearest There is an evacuation plan in a wall file pocket in both the entry and lunch room. to Emergency Contacts: 1 • Bill Boston-206.255.2872 cell Gai Oei—603-380-0352 cell,Media Contact -360.886.9402 home George Smith—909.393.6097,ESH Manager Eli Burks—206.255.2873 cell Torn Tisa—412.490.8928,Environmental Johnson—-206.722.5246 home Don Herbst—412.490.8524,Safety Affairs LeRoy John —425.432.9162 borne Jeff Felder—412.490.8941,VP Regulatory Kathy Tyson—253.638.0725 home Onyx Environmental:206.241.3000 Chemtrec:1.800.424.9300 Police and Fire:911 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE TRANSMITTAL DATE: June 25, 2009 TO: Ann Dower, Senior Development Review Engineer Scott Sproul, Assistant Building Official Chris Ingham, South King Fire & Rescue FROM: Deb Barker FOR DRC MTG. ON: July 9, 2009 FILE NUMBER(S): 09-102236-00-UP RELATED FILE NOS. : None PROJECT NAME: THERMO FISHER SCIENTIFIC Building inquiry PROJECT ADDRESS: 822 S 333RD ST ZONING DISTRICT: OP PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Request for code interpretation defining the intent and application of per Chapter 19 .30 FWRC nonconformance. PROJECT CONTACT: TOYER CONSULTING DAVIDTOYER 1208113THAVESE MATERIALS SUBMITTED: Letter with 9 questions with building background. You may not have any comments to the questions but still asking... TOYER CONSULTING & ADVOCACY, LLC .208 113th Avenue Southeast, Lake Stevens,WA 98258 June 16,2009 Mr.Greg Fewins, Director Community Development Department City of Federal Way 33325 8th Avenue South PO Box 9718 Federal Way,WA 98063-9718 RE: COVER SHEET/CHECKLIST FOR CODE INTERPRETATION PER CHAPTER 19.50 FWRC V"4 copies of a Completed Master Land Use Application [Chapter 19.50.030(2)] v 4 copies of a Written Description [Chapter 19.50.030(2)(a)—(c)] Fee [Chapter 10.50.030(3)] According to the current 2009 Fee Schedule,page 6, there are no fees for a code interpretation under Process 1. 0 folded copies of the site plan [Bulletin#0531 No site plan is being submitted,as the code interpretation does not involve any proposed changes to the site or structure. This was confirmed via a phone conversation with Matt Herrera on June 16,2009. Sincerely, David K.Toyer Owner TOYER CONSULTING & ADVOCACY, LLC 1208 113th Avenue Southeast, Lake Stevens,WA 98258 June 16,2009 Mr. Greg Fewins, Directors Community Development Department City of Federal Way 33325 8th Avenue South PO Box 9718 Federal Way,WA 98063-9718 RE: Request for Interpretation per Chapter 19.50 of the Federal Way Revised Code(FWRC) Dear Mr. Fewins: On behalf of my client, Concentric 2, LLC., I am submitting a request for an interpretation under Chapter 19.50 FWRC. The interpretation seeks clarification of the intent and application of Chapter 19.30 Nonconformance to a 1.87 acre parcel(Parcel#9265000160), located at 822 S. 333`d ST, Federal Way, WA 98003. Property Background and History The following is a description of the background and history of the property in question: • An application for a permit to construct a 25,000 square foot commercial warehouse and office building was submitted on February 24, 1987 in King County. • On June 5, 1987, King County issued a building permit for construction of the commercial warehouse and office. Permit Number 105814. Exhibit 1 • King County issued a Certificate of Occupancy for the existing structure on December 9, 1987. Exhibit 2 • The use of the building on parcel 9265000160 has not changed since its permitting, construction and original occupancy in 1987. • Within the 25,000 square foot building, approximately 5,000 square feet is used for offices and operations and 20,000 square feet is used for warehousing/distribution. History of Legislative Actions • The property was incorporated into the City of Federal Way in 1990. • On February 27, 1990,the City Council adopted Ordinance 90-43, enacting an official zoning map and placing zoning classifications on all property within the city limits. Exhibit 3 • Ordinance 90-43 became effective on February 28, 1990 upon official incorporation of the City. • Chapter 165, Non-Conformance,was included within Ordinance 90-43. • On page 165-1 of the Ordinance(Chapter 165.10) "When Conformance is Required,"stated that: "If an aspect, element, activity or use of or on the subject property conformed to the applicable Zoning Code in effect at the time that aspect, element, activity or use was constructed or initiated, that aspect, element, activity or use may continue and need not be brought into conformance with this Code unless a provision of this Chapter requires conformance." • The property in question conformed to the Zoning Code in effect at the time that the use was constructed and no other provisions of Ordinance 90-43 or its resultant Zoning Code required the use be brought into conformance. • The present zoning designation for the property is OP, Office Park. Exhibit 4 • The present comprehensive plan designation for the property is OP, Office Park. Exhibit 5 Request for Interpretation In accordance with Chapter 19.50 FWRC,we seek an Interpretation of the provisions of Chapter 19.30 FWRC, Nonconformance,specifically: Chapter 19.30.030 1. Confirmation that the subject parcel is a legal, non-conforming use and may continue as allowed by Chapter 19.30.030 FWRC. Chapter 19.30.080 2. Clarification of what constitutes"normal maintenance" as referred to within Chapter 19.30.080(1)(b). Does normal maintenance include tenant improvements? Do tenant improvements fall under the restriction on alterations to no more than 15%of the appraised value in any one consecutive 12 month period? Chapter 19.30.090 3. Under Chapter 19.30.090(a),what conditions would constitute a change of use and what are some specific examples that show how the criteria in Chapter 19.05.030 have been applied? 4. What conditions or circumstances may trigger the City viewing the existing and legally non- conforming use of the 25,000 square foot warehouse/distribution facility as having undergone a change of use? 5. Specific to previous question,does the city have any thresholds that it has used or would use to determine how it would interpret a change in use based on a change to"the type,extent or amount of indoor or outdoor storage"as described under criteria (5) in the definition for Change of Use? For example, if a future tenant was to increase its office area and reduce the size of its warehouse/distribution area, but continue to operate as a warehouse/distribution facility,would that qualify as a change in use? 6. Under Chapter 19.30.090(e), how does the City define cessation of a use? For example, is tenant vacancy considered cessation of a use if the vacancy lasts longer than one year? Or is cessation of use under subsection (e)similar to that of subsection (d),Abandonment? Applicability 7. What is the difference in circumstance between the applicability of Chapter 19.30.080 versus that of 19.30.090 as it relates to the situation, property and structure in question? For example, tenant improvements would not appear to trigger Chapter 19.30.090, but appear to trigger 19.30.080 if they are more than 15%of the current appraised value of the structure. What specific provisions of code are applicable to this parcel and its status? 8. What sections of code should my client reference in order to continue to maintain the existing and legally non-conforming use of warehouse/distribution at this location? 9. Please provide any additional information that may be helpful to my client in maintaining the existing and legally non-conforming use of the property as warehouse/distribution. Thank you for your time and consideration. Should you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me at any time. Sincerely, yid K.Toye Owner CC: Mr. Mike Collins,Concentric 2, LLC. t , I \ ./ '' /It / GRATE= 353.0 - I\ \'•\ C• I \ AI%%, /.E.= 350./2- G.P. E. A Qt 1 1 H- A SY. ..\ - I SkO \ �) 1 �� w/sro rr.oa4p7vR 1's 13.01. 56R40E TO 1 v A-LEV .1.5" orip, % / I ( g••x 9" b•' TEE � •1 1 '/ /�_ 1�' / % i' 1 \ c Soh, , ,,,„.. ._\,„ j .;, © ROCKY OR STRUCTURAL / � 1� EXTEn n ...-- ./..,'". r11 dER/77 (O� OTHER) • ' \ l ooc� *1-011111/11117 1_ � i1; S E LP17 CP7PE Pei in 0 pr ,\ 1 I� ts, / Op tQL�, \ o %I i. / OOP t,�P t ( ��-l4 5 /46,1_,p/44,0 � \ ,�I RO KERY 177Ax. 6.O.�` \ 't �;� 0 �P ` R /1� / �IFZZ N ►.`1 (T .) 5L E AT 3: 1 FROM ry \ D P1' �PK D O� �4Ec,G �5t %I P PER L/NE. CONSTRUCT ROCKERY t► Fxo \ FOR t.Gt CSE 01 Dr , g� �`(YA •(' ,% AS NEEDS TO MEET rCELEVAT/ONS 0.5' cS�'9i� \ k % 0 "\\ 0 L ,J B0l 2 , f, ;, i'V1 Ill \ ��,1 AB VE/N /GATED PLOP/LINE ELEYAT/ONS. If ------- is ti e, 0 ‘ f 6.., NIP 47 si.V \ �p �G E y,1� P�! Liiiiiiri .•:.Z \ ' ura°411 � P 0\ . C , rLt. /. 3 12 CMP, N./ W. 4 o •\ ' •' /t1� 04. ,10 Ol 0° 5P°i 'c 0R6 !� • 1. S ` i • O ,� 0 JAW/ I X . c.°- \ ,rr.°TP.4,* 1-41 oe.si\\ \ . „,„4, ,,,, .... t: cf#1, .G6 nve,16,26i, $0.1. 441115 . le, 35 .---- _• •- .294J-10 % \ \ \_ I) 'AP • 358.6 I \I \ �\tkt.,\ \ \ 1/10 59 - I %.& \\ i'lNt.11.4‘,\ e / I .14, Ll _ e D5 /-k c.,/ F. o n0 R CKERY \u \ v > 4f\ Aii. 55yD o e �\ ,o A a 1 V4`� E OETAlL) � / f \VI A .tit P Hf•Z \-ono \ -.� - ' ' 11t #4 -• TYPE IL- 54" w/ SEPA R '65 i ,, \ S APE ` ' • 1 fr ATE 352.5 . Tt. C c ` LP �yrBrx e- TEE }jl f /d f gs /t"CMP, E. O 1• �3'' —� 347. 10 /s"CMP, S. o O1Pr 'i• t _ t� -- \\ 349.4 - /2"PERf.CMP, 5E/5W \ X / --.1° le to."... §.• �i 3jo N''''''''d'i o` L. 1S \ ' .� �� /�' ''8 fNst`� EXIST. .B. _____..--(------ NOTE •.1.1 , z ��s1. GRATE 357 73\I ,_0 % j ConnEC r Roof 4 �i Founoq non oRAIris \ w \ � E— T SFPFROTFLY TO STOR? / srt:.CA t _ o ��' /•t --- \ \ \ • \ Z \ \\\ \ \ 7 • .,./ , \ \ Z , .. , \ V7/ /1 I 7 / It , . \ ' NEU WARE-HM.15E 4 OFFICE BUILDING . , 7 .. V \\ ---- - .„-- / \ \\,--- ----\-- 7: NEW HYDRAN , -f (BY o'rwER.5) , . . . qf \ I \ \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ FUTURE , 1 \ EXPAN6101\J . oCO° \\:„ N ' .e.- 7 - .LIEBE R c.o -ro 6•CART e 7 \\ . 4 .\ s ' 1 5-0 oulsirn. or est.m..vING - ..-, .... V\ ' \\ •••1,061 syCxocrit‘ , \ L VALVE ---) \ , \ H,(IWO ER.S CO , \• , , \ ' \g, pa BI- PE-T.c.Hos s* (BYoffri ER5) Nv 2rDI \ ... . NEW HYDRAN -If • > 8 { (BY o•rmER6) —Al \\\\N 80k - -- -— __-- ----- ,------ -- \ 61 F-I— INFO. -‘, — , ----\ „ \ \ -1. , — a _ - CV° .61Af I C. : 85 \ 1 \ 8 - RE5IDUAL-1 441 \ \ FLo JO 1 , PER:N.5.13.5. -------.' ,, - 'ss-------Ex iofING HYDRAwr A , \ 1 ,,- I Li> el•.'i''' \--- i 1 , . _______ --i'- '.., s' . ..... , ."? .' ---, ' ‘1 1 i„,, •.-: r i Ii ilitt 64 /1e *---- , 'I 1 • • Al ...•. ?)'1 .'' 4A4 b e\ = lo ', ___ ____ A...._ 40 ., 0 • _ • . . ________.......,..._...,.. ( ......—...., _, ..._., ,-,.) ik '--- ' '- '•'--- - t- '-'-'. - to i "1"... ..- ... ::..:-...:, ...