Loading...
03-103061 ` CITY OF CITY HALL Fe d e ra I Way 33530 1st Way O•South Box 9718 Federal Way,WA -9 (253)661-4000 www.cityoffederalway.corn August 18, 2003 Mark Cozart ritiOI 5014 22"d Avenue NE Tacoma, WA 98422 RE: File No: 03-103061-000-00-AD; Reply to Inquiry 5134 SW 311th Place, Federal Way Dear Mr. Cozart: On July 24, 2003, the City of Federal Way Department of Community Development Services received your request for information related to a proposal to do necessary maintenance and repair to a 609 square foot beach cabin and retaining wall located on tax parcel number 321020 0171. The property in question is zoned Single-family residential (RS15.0). The beach cabin, which you propose to restore, appears to be located within 200 feet of the Ordinary High Water Mark(OHWM). The property in question is considered nonconforming in that a single-family residence located on the adjacent property straddles the property line of the subject property. The following is an analysis of the issues related to your proposal. Please be aware that this analysis is preliminary in nature, given the limited information provided in the inquiry. Further review by the City will be required as part of any formal proposal. Shoreline Jurisdiction Area—The beach cabin in question appears to be within 200 feet of the Ordinary High Water Mark(OHWM) of Puget Sound and, as such, is subject to the Washington State Shoreline Management Act, Federal Way Shoreline Master Program (SMP), and applicable Federal Way shoreline regulations. Pursuant to Washington Administrative Code(WAC) 173-27-040(2)(g), construction on shorelands by an owner of a single-family residence for their own use or for the use of their family, is exempt from State shoreline substantial development permit requirements. While the beach cabin is exempt from a substantial development permit, your proposal is nonetheless subject to all requirements of the Federal Way City Code(FWCC), as identified below. Stringilne and OHWM Setbacks— Pursuant to FWCC Section 18-165(d)(3), single-family residential development shall maintain a minimum setback behind the stringline setback, or 50 feet from the OHWM, whichever is greater. For your information, "stringline setback"is defined as a straight line drawn between the points on the primary buildings having the greatest projection waterward on the two adjacent properties. In the case of the property in question, the primary buildings on the two adjacent properties are well outside of the shoreline jurisdiction area, which is the area within 200 feet of the OHWM. As such, the stringline setback does not apply to the beach cabin. While the stringline setback does not apply to this structure, the requirement that the structure be located a minimum of 50 feet from the OHWM does apply. Based on staff field inspection, it appears that the structure is likely within the 50 foot OHWM setback. If this were, in fact, the case, then the structure would be considered legally nonconforming as to shoreline setback. Any proposal for this property will require a survey showing the OWHM. See also Geologically Hazardous Areas, below. Nonconforming structures—Pursuant to FWCC Section 18-175, applications for building permits to modify a nonconforming use or development may be approved if: Doc.I.D.#24199 1) The modifications will make the use or development less nonconforming; or 2) The modifications will not make the use or development more nonconforming. In addition, a nonconforming development, which is destroyed, deteriorated, or damaged more than 75 percent of its fair market value, may be reconstructed only consistent with regulation set forth in the Shoreline chapter of the FWCC. The proposal you have described in your inquiry would not increase the gross floor area of the structure, nor its height. As such, the repairs would not be considered as making the development more nonconforming. However, it is necessary to determine whether the structure is deteriorated more than 75 percent of its fair market value. In order to make this determination, you must submit to the City the following: 1) An appraisal, from a source acceptable to the City, of the fair market value of the structure. 2) An itemized fair market valuation of the proposed repairs. The City will make an assessment of this submitted information. If the nonconforming structure is not deteriorated or damaged more than 75 percent of its fair market value, then it can be reconstructed after obtaining the necessary building permits. If the required valuations indicate that the structure is deteriorated or damaged more than 75 percent of its fair market value, then you would be required to obtain a Shoreline Variance in order to rebuild the structure. Shoreline Variance—Pursuant to FWCC Section 18-171, the purpose of a shoreline variance is to grant relief to specific performance standards set forth in the shoreline master program, and where there is an extraordinary or unique circumstance relating to the property such that the strict implementation of the shoreline master program would impose unnecessary hardship on the applicant or thwart the policies of the Shoreline Management Act. A variance from the standards of the master program may be granted only when the applicant can demonstrate that all of the criteria identified in FWCC Section 18-171(c)(1-7) are met. Please refer to the enclosed code section for specific information. If you intend to pursue a shoreline variance, then a preapplication meeting application and conference must be completed prior to initiation of the shoreline variance process. Shoreline variances are reviewed under Process IV, Hearing Examiner's Decision, and require a public hearing. The final decision on a shoreline variance request is issued by the Department of Ecology. The fee for applying for a shoreline variance is $3,614.50. It is not possible at this time to indicate whether the City would or would not support a variance request for the proposal. Accessory Dwelling Unit—Another issue related to the project involves the status of the beach cottage as a possible second dwelling unit within a single-family zoning district. During a site visit, the owner produced a survey of the subject property showing that the beach cottage is actually on the northeasterly lot, where it has historically stood as the primary residence. A second residence is located on the southwesterly lot, (tax lot number 321020 0165). While the subject property is nonconforming in that the garage addition straddles the common property line, the beach cottage is not required to meet ADU standards, pursuant to FWCC Section 22-648, in that it is, in fact, a principal residence on tax lot number 321020 0171. Existing Nonconformances of Residential structures—A final issue related to this property concerns the single family dwelling unit located on the parcel to the southwest of the beach cabin lot. This dwelling unit apparently straddles the coterminous property line. You indicated in your letter that it is your understanding that the lots were"combined"in September 2001 during a previous remodel. Please be advised that the City has no record that a lot line elimination has occurred on this property, and the primary dwelling unit is still located on top of a property line, which renders the structure Doc.I.D.#24199 nonconforming as to required side yard setbacks. While the King County Assessor's office has combined the tax lots under a single parcel number(321020 0165), two legal lots of record currently remain. The nonconformance of this single-family dwelling unit would become an issue if the proposed cabin restoration triggers compliance under FWCC Section 22-335(6), which states that doing any work, other than normal maintenance' or other than tenant improvements2, in any one consecutive 12-month period to an improvement that is nonconforming and the fair market value of the alteration, change or other work exceeds 50 percent of the assessed or appraised value of that improvement, then the applicant shall meet all development regulations applicable to the property. Based on the preliminary description of the proposed work, it would appear that the project meets the definition of"normal maintenance", (i.e., repairing the roof, replacing portions of the wall, repairing the foundation). If the project exceeds the definition of"normal maintenance or tenant improvement", then it would require that the property owner either obtain a Lot Line Elimination (LLE) in order to bring the primary structure into compliance with required side-yard setbacks (five feet from each side property line), or to complete a Boundary Line Adjustment(BLA) to relocate the internal property line so that the side setbacks are satisfied .If you should choose to pursue an LLE, please be aware that the beach cabin would be required to be registered as an ADU.The fee for an LLE is $144.00; a handout on applying for an LLE is enclosed. The fee for a Boundary Line Adjustment is $1,193.50; a handout on applying for a BLA is likewise enclosed. In addition, it appears that the beach cabin may be located within 5-feet of the adjacent property to the north. If this is the case, the beach cabin itself would be considered nonconforming as to setback, as established in FWCC Section 22-631,and again subject to FWCC Section 22-335(6). An analysis of the proposed work would need to verify that the thresholds of this code section are not exceeded, or the project would require that the beach cabin be relocated outside of the five-foot side yard setback. Geologically Hazardous Area and State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA)—The project area is within 25 feet of a geologically hazardous area(GHA),3 which, pursuant to FWCC Section 22-1223, is considered to be an environmentally sensitive area. However, pursuant to Washington Administrative Code(WAC) 197-11-800(3), repair, remodeling and maintenance activities are categorically exempt from review under SEPA, when the project does not involve material expansion or a change of use. The project is, nonetheless, subject to regulation under FWCC Section 22-1286, "Geologically Hazardous Areas Development."Pursuant to this code section, before approving any development activity or land surface modification, the City will require the applicant to submit the following information relative to the proposed retaining wall repair and foundation work: a) A soils report prepared by a qualified professional engineer licensed in the state that describes how the development will impact slope stability, landslide hazard, and sloughing on the subject property and nearby properties. b) Recommended foundation design. c) Recommended methods for mitigating identified impacts and a description of how these mitigating measures may impact adjacent properties. ' Normal Maintenance is defined as including interior and exterior repairs and incidental alterations. Normal maintenance and repair may include,but is not limited to,paining, roof repair and replacement,plumbing,wiring and electrical systems,mechanical equipment replacement and weatherization. Incidental alterations may include construction of nonbearing walls or partitions. 2 Tenant Improvement means any work, improvement or remodeling completely within the interior of a building necessary to meet the varied requirements of continuing or succeeding tenants. 3 A GHA includes the following areas: 1)erosion hazard areas; 2)landslide hazard areas;3)seismic hazard areas; and 4)steep slope hazard areas,which are those areas with a sloe of 40 percent or greater and with a vertical relief of 10 or more feet for every 25 feet of horizontal distance. Doc.I.D.#24199 If the City approves any development activity or land surface modification under this section, it may, among other appropriate conditions, impose the following conditions of approval: a)That the recommendations of the soils report be followed. b) That the applicant pay for the services of a qualified professional engineer selected and retained by the City to review the soils report and other relevant information. c) That a qualified professional engineer be present on site during all land surface modification. The required geotechnical report must address the impacts of the work that has been done as well as any measures that may be required to mitigate the effects of the unauthorized work. The report must also identify the impacts of the corrective action and any required mitigation. In order for the City to provide specific information related to the required process for restoring the beach cabin, please submit the above-identified information to the City for further analysis. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (253) 661-4120. Sincerely, 44„.t. Jane Gamble Associate Planner C: Scott Sproul, Plans Examiner Jim Harris,Senior Planner Enclosures Doc.I.D.#24199 � 3- ID 0Co l - D0— RECEIVED Mr. Greg Fewins Deputy Director,Community Development Services Department JUL 33530 1st Way South £003 PO Box 9718 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY Federal Way,WA 98063-9718 BUILDING DEPT. July 16,2003 Dear Mr. Fewins, The purpose of this letter is to explore the potential upgrade of an existing building at 5134 SW 311th Place,Federal Way,98023. Currently there are 2 buildings on the property,one being a beach cabin built in approximately 1938. One belief is that the building was originally on a pier and later filled under when the rock bulkhead was put in. The building has suffered a great deal over time. It has endured a fire,the collapse of a retaining wall,rot and insect infestation. The result is a building that is not usable as it was intended and is an eyesore in the community. We would like to restore this building so that it is similar to its original state. To do this will entail a great deal of work. This work would consist of removing roofing,trusses, rotten logs and possibly disassemble and reassembly of the entire building to allow for raising the building off the sand and to construct an adequate foundation on new piers. The concrete wall currently retaining the hillside has failed and is leaning against the house. We would like to rebuild this wall with adequate engineering. The wall is currently about three feet high and fifty feet long. The size would not change. The original house was a 609 square foot log home with a large deck on two sides. The house has one bathroom on septic. All this would remain unchanged. A fire destroyed part of the original structure,which was replaced with conventional framing. This would be replaced with logs. While this project is extensive,it would add no square footage,bedrooms or baths. It would also bring the building up to the standard of others in the neighborhood. The parcel numbers of the property are 321020 0165-07 and 321020 0171. The lots were combined in September 2001 during a previous remodel. The building to be remodeled is on the beach below the main house. Please let me know if you see any issues with getting a permit for this process. Thank o ‘ievoz._ Mark Cozart � 1 2c, C f L Co 5(ot—2 37/ 5o11/ 72 /9✓e v✓, r. �Cr'ov✓lq we. 9E14/ZZ. O _ _ Q ,a C\) -7 < 00 0 -y-d w s,' ssS- ,,•'' ' ' \ ti 4t N.-6: I I /tr/ \ t...k 1 P -( I —.— — i0l' ‘ ro18 Ns• ° � ,k,/ �� � F so\, L O .0oS 0 � ti obeu to \ r • °•OI ` V S �N 3 N o �� 't 11 �° r b tip' _ 8 �\d ZZ ° ��/b 3 �; o �� �5 ti Y i b l• b,<.ilil �J(�� `0 (1\ �`0S O `Z. M C, M °� .0 F� '♦ / GO O �� GZ \ / ` �^ P ' \ - 'ym \,ec Off/ h W z� g ' \0 / N o V� .,, M oQ t bd �♦ '/fir+ n t S ��>b' tl� }ti b Z ,0 \ �� 3 �. cn\M Jpn / Lw ` r. oo S /" $ 6 A m -3 cv t'$ Z ` o \ti w S \ \ 9Z ao =G /0 vI . cY,.qi) ,,,\,i5 t \° 0 p • � `i 1 ! y ° o `i _ I \ \ J ti0 72, sM� •♦ra O • 4� ,�y� r E� \ \ \� r,.o ci an''' /, o ofJ \ \ �' 8Z \ o (co , w \ \ C"v \ p cL Cr / I n I , ,.. )c) \\ ,,. o V,/ 0.// i \ -1 °6 F. 3 M ' , fl• \ b� -r \ Zo m Q agi i \ \ ill �p w ,Eh 4 ti oti f a, 2 , - l), ° • tl' \ Z H, i y / \0 ,\ir3 o-• z Qb �.� 8�0� =� o� q d a / N \{� \ Q KO� � /� 9J r/ mN �) \ � ocs - \5EZo - o •/ \ p \ �� T T / OI yV \n \ /4 r r \ \ N C.r .5, d s sh o' '� f-1. 00 i'/ N d \ \ \ r d�c�f �. ?. & / -0 \ \ w '7,0 .• \ O ,• °/ s. °I H \Q`� 1\ \ N ,._ -` 4 \ Q / �i 7 1 lv r ccr o° ,\e'co `� ' 2 w /1 \ .1 ' \ \ a • ° .. \ 1 /t'l . . \ Cn Pa o NaN -P I v O CA) I� I I "I." ",. ♦ I Ca ' `� • gi ra p. /� • 1 • y♦ �I • ® I N p ♦♦♦ S IA I p ♦, Gal cm ♦ �, (xi OI V O ♦ N ♦ 4.. O ♦S O ,` W te'll'a.."-- .. 0,.' '..,...'..,.., P6 • 1p 1 _ ..I- s. .. 0 A N W p ,iS: W 1 Ao t0.I0 . ,---te ul • - \ ,, �, " ; • c♦r7 t N NW CDN '€� " ''2 NO - 1 A N ,�'; j0 W .. 671 r4. W I ,1i r