12-104902 FILE
` CITY OF Cf1Y HALL
33321 Feder 8th Avenue South
... Federal Way
Federal Way,WA 98003-6325
(253)835-7000
www.cilyoffederalway.com
November 8, 2012
Tim Giacometti
BullivantlHouserjBailey,Attorneys at Law
1700 7th Avenue South, Suite 1810
Seattle, WA 98101
RE: Permit#12-104902-00-AD; RESPONSE LETTER TO OWNER INQUIRY
Lake Easter Estates-Dry Rot Repair,Deck Replacement,and Tree Removal
Dear Mr.Giacometti,
On October 25,2012,the City of Federal Way's Department of Community and Economic Development
received your inquiry regarding the dry rot repair,deck replacement,and tree removal at Lake Faster
Estates. Your letter inquires whether the City would require the replacement of entire decks under the
circumstances described in the same letter. In the interest of clarity,the circumstances are paraphrased
below,with staff response following.
"It is necessary to repair dry rot on the exterior of several buildings on the Lake Easter
Estates property.To gain access to portions of the deteriorating siding, it may be
necessary to temporarily detach portions of exterior decks and deck stairs from the walls
of the buildings.Once the siding is repaired,the decks are expected to be re-attached and
restored to the configuration that existed immediately prior to the siding repairs."
The repairing of dry rot on the building's exterior would be considered normal maintenance. Pursuant to
Federal Way Revised Code(FWRC) 19.30.090(d)"Nonconforming Development,"normal maintenance
is exempt from needing to bring the deck into full compliance.Normal maintenance and repair;defined
by FWRC 19.05.140 N definitions, includes, but is not limited to,painting, roof repair and replacement,
plumbing,wiring and electrical systems, mechanical equipment replacement,and weatherization. It is the
City's interpretation that siding repair should fall under this definition and does not trigger the
nonconforming section of FWRC.Therefore,the City would not require the entire deck to come into
conformance and it can be re-attached and restored to the configuration immediately prior to siding
repairs.
Your letter also requests an update on the status of the Association's application for tree removal. The
Board of Directors for Lakes Easter Estates has submitted a plan to remove and/or replace trees on the
East side of the lake near Units 1-16.The city is waiting on additional information before final approval is
granted. It is my understanding that all of the London Plane Sycamore,Vine Maple,and Oak trees that
are in close proximity to the decks are intended to be removed.There is no narrative on whether the
stumps and roots will remain. The unit owner you represent is free to bring her concern to the board and
request that the stump and roots remain after tree removal for her property.
I trust this letter satisfies your inquiries. Please feel free to contact me should you have any questions
regarding the responses in this letter at 253-835-2634 or kennith.george@cityoffederalway.com.
Mr.Giacometti
November 8,2012
Page 2
Sincerel ,
•
Kennith George
Planning Intern
c: Grace Skidmore,Development Specialist
12-104902 Doc.ID.62539
Chapter 19.30 NONCONFORMANCE Page 1 of 2
19.30.090 Nonconforming development.
(1) If any aspect, structure, improvement or development does not conform to the
development regulations prescribed in this title, that aspect, structure, improvement or
development must be brought into conformance or otherwise improved as set forth
below.
(a) Increase in gross floor area. If an applicant proposes to increase the gross
floor area of any use on the subject property in any one of the following ways, the
applicant shall comply with the development regulations in effect at the time of the
proposal, as specified below:
i if expansion of gross floor area of an existing building occurs either
through addition of new floors within the structure or enlargement of the existing building
footprint, the applicant shall comply with all development regulations in effect at the time
the expansion is proposed. If the property on which the expansion is proposed is
occupied by multiple tenants or uses, the applicant shall comply with those development
regulations applicable to the geographic portion of the site on which the expansion is
proposed; or
If a new and separate structure is being constructed on an already
developed site, the applicant shall comply with all development regulations applicable to
the geographic portion of the site on which the new structure and any related
improvements re to be constructed; or
If the increase in gross floor area involves an existing single-family
residential d elling, the applicant shall comply with the development regulations in effect
at the time of the proposal. For single-family residences, existing nonconformities may
remain and continue so long as the existing nonconformities are not being increased or
expanded in any way. New construction or renovation which involves the increase in
gross floor area of a nonconforming single-family structure is subject to all applicable
requirements of this Code irioluding but not limited to provisions related to critical areas
(Division V of this title), off-street parking (Chapter 19.130 FWRC), improvements
(Chapter 19.135 FWRC), and landscaping (Chapter 19.125 FWRC).
If the increase hit ross floor area involves an existing single-story
building in t city center thatnconforming as to the ground floor size limits
established in Chapter 19.225 WRC, the existing building footprint shall not be
enlarged, except the director may approve minor additions such as entry structures,
lobbies, seating or dining areas, bay windows, and similar features; provided, that such
addition(s) shall not exceed 1,000 square feet per building in any one consecutive 12-
month period, and shall not increase the extent of any other nonconformance.
abandonment. If an applicant proposes any work, including tenant
impro ments, on property that h4s been abandoned, the applicant shall comply with all
development regulations applicable to the subject property, to the extent physically or
technical! practicable on the site.
The use conducted on the subject property has ceased for more than one
year, i whi h case the applicant shall repair and/or restore the improvements on the site
(e.g., drainage, landscaping, curbing, parking, parking lot landscaping, etc.) to a condition
as near as physically possible to the cond)tion required by the requirements of approval
Hof the existing development.
— (d)The applicant is making any alteration or changes or doing any work, othe,
than normal maintenance, tenant improvements, or minor additions noted in subsection
(1)(a)(iv) of this section, 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. The
appraisal must be from a state-certified real estate appraiser. In the event this subsection
is triggered with respect to a single-tenant or single-occupant site, the applicant shall
http://www.codepublishing.com/WA/FederalWay/html/FederalWay 19/FederalWay 1930.ht... 11/2/2012
Chapter 19.30 NONCONFORM A NCE Page 2 of 2
meet all development regulations applicable to the property. In the event this Si,ce,G,az
subsection is triggered with respect to a site occupied by multiple tenants or uses, the citrrjp �L
applicant shall comply with those development regulations applicable to the geographic or-
portion of the site on which the alteration, change or improvement is proposed. For 4‘k.c
purposes of determining value under this section, improvements required pursuant to this
section (nonconforming development), FWRC 19.30.110 (when public improvements
must be installed), 19.30.120 (nonconforming water quality improvements) and
19.135.030 (when public improvements must be installed) shall not be counted towards
the 50 percent threshold which would trigger application of this subsection.
(2) This section does not govern application of Chapter 19.115 FWRC, Community
Design Guidelines; application of Chapter 19.115 FWRC is governed by FWRC
19.115.010 through 19.115.100, as amended. This section also does not govern
application of development regulations relating to water quality, signs, or street/sidewalk
improvements; application of those development regulations is governed by FWRC
19.30.100, 19.30.110, 19.30.120 and 19.135.020, all as amended.
http://www.codepublishing.com/WA/FederalWay/html/FederalWay 19/FederalWay 1930.ht... 11/2/2012
1j -/oy 900za
410 Bullivant Houser BaileyFc
Attorneys at Law
TIM GIACOMETTI RECEIVED
Addmittedd in in Washington and Oregon
Direct Dial:(206)521-6430
E-mail:tim.giacometti@bullivant.com O C T 2 5
2012
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
October 24, 2012 CDS
Via E-mail
Grace Skidmore
Development Specialist
Department of Community Services
City of Federal Way
33325 8th Avenue South
Federal Way, WA 98003
Re: Lake Easter Estates—Dry Rot Repair and Deck Replacement; Tree Removal
Dear Grace:
Thank you for speaking with me this morning regarding Lake Easter Estates'
proposed deck replacement. As I have mentioned, we represent, Karen Mork, a unit owner
at Lake Easter Estates and we have been in communications with the homeowners'
association board(the "Board") regarding the repairing of dry rot on the exterior of several
buildings, including the one in which Mrs. Mork resides. The Board appears now finally to
be planning such repairs, but its plans implicate City zoning requirements in a way that
significantly and, we think, unnecessarily, increase the cost to the unit owners.
As I explained, to gain access to portions of the deteriorating siding, it may very well
be necessary to temporarily detach portions of exterior decks and deck stairs from the walls
of the buildings. If the deck components cannot be detached, it may be necessary to cut
away portions of deck. Once the siding is repaired, however, we would expect the decks
would be re-attached and restored to the configuration that existed immediately prior to the
siding repairs. The Board has not yet provided any estimates, but we could see the cost of
this work being in the range of$3,000 to $5,000 per unit.
But what concerns Mrs. Mork and prompts this letter is that the Board informs us that
she will also be required to replace—at her cost—her entire deck. In fact, the Board tells us
that the City is requiring each unit owner to replace his or her entire deck in accordance with
1700 Seventh Avenue, Suite 1810, Seattle, Washington 98101
Main 206 292 8930 Fax 206 386 5130
www.bullivant.com
Offices in Washington,Oregon&California
•
Grace Skidmore
October 24, 2012
Page 2
deck designs that have been approved by the City. This requirement is purportedly triggered
by the need to "cut away" portions of the decks to replace the siding,
As you can imagine, the cost of replacing an entire deck that is in very good condition
—easily in the range of$15,000 or more—and the nuisance of such construction is both
wasteful and objectionable, especially given that the only building component actually
needing repair is the siding. We understand that this requirement will affect at least 16 unit
owners, most of whom, we suspect, have not been informed of it by the Board(or this issue
probably would have already come to your attention).
Furthermore, while we have some of the communications between the Board and the
City, we do not believe that the Board has accurately conveyed to the City the context in
which the Board has sought the City's approval of replacement deck designs. To be clear,
except for perhaps a few instances, the Lake Easter Estates unit owners are not asking to
have their decks replaced. Mrs. Mork certainly isn't.
Therefore, we are writing to seek the City's confirmation of whether or not it would
require the replacement of entire decks under the circumstances described above. If the City
does require the decks to be replaced simply on account of siding repairs, we would request
the City's analysis of what zoning code provisions it relies on for that decision as well as the
procedures for appealing such a decision.
We also request an update on the status of the Association's application for tree
removal on the Lake Easter Estates property. Mrs. Mork has two oak trees coming up
through her deck. These particular trees are now pushing against the railings of her second
floor balcony and, therefore, need to be removed. So she supports removing these trees, but
is concerned that the stump and roots should remain in place to continue to provide soil
stability along the lake. She is also concerned that the Association has sought approval to
remove other trees that provide :oil stability, privacy and wildlife habitat.
We look forward to your response.
Very truly yo ,
Tim Giacometti
TGG
13906517.I
® www.bullivant.com Washington I Oregon I California
CITY OP
Federal Way MEMORANDUM
DATE: June 8, 2012
TO: William McDaniel, President
Lake Easter Estates COA
FROM: Grace Skidmore, Development Specialist
Community& Economic Development Department
SUBJECT: Lake Easter Estates Condominiums Deck Repairs
Approved Basic Plan #12-102024-00-MF
1301 S 308th Street
The Basic plan showing the three potential design types for replacement decks at Lake Easter
Estates Condominiums, Buildings 1 through 4,is approved and building permits for individual
decks can be issued contingent upon the following:
1. This approval is valid until the adoption of a new edition of the International Building
Code,anticipated on July 1, 2013.
2. Each deck shall require a separate building permit, but will not require plan review to
utilize the approved designs.
3. Modifications to existing decks not in accordance with this approved plan must undergo
a separate review process for building permit, including land use review, and modified
decks will need to be brought into compliance with current building codes.
4. No additional land use review will be required to replace decks which are currently
nonconforming as to setback from Lake Easter(25' minimum) if utilizing this plan.
Approval is based on the replacement decks being the same size as existing approved
decks. Available records indicate that the original structures were approximately 169
square feet (13' x 13'). In the absence of evidence showing approval of a larger deck
(such as a building permit) subsequent to the original construction, nonconforming decks
will be required to be brought into conformance if any work is done beyond normal
maintenance.
5. Replacement decks proposed utilizing an alternative design will be required to undergo
land use review prior to building permit.
Grace Skidmore
From: w mcdaniel[wmd@7thpower.net]
Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2012 8:39 PM
To: Grace Skidmore
Subject: RE: lake easter estates-decks
Grace,
I don't have any additional plans.
We discussed the need to modify some decks due to building maintenance. During our meeting,you informed me that
any modification to a nonconforming deck(due to previous work done without a permit and/or encroaching into the 25'
setback from the Lake's OHM) will require that deck to be brought into compliance with the 13 x 13 deck size and city
building codes.Will your letter contain wording covering this situation?
I will try and stop by tomorrow and pick up the 'Dave Lee' letter.
Thanks for all the time you and the staff have spent on this.
Wm. McDaniel
President, Lake Easter Estates COA
office: (253)839-4641
cell:(253)332-4078
From: Grace Skidmore[mailto:Grace.Skidmore@cityoffederalway.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2012 3:12 PM
To: 'w mcdaniel'
Subject: RE: lake easter estates-decks
Hello again,at last-
I have been trying to coordinate some things with Isaac regarding the language for conditioning the individual permits.
One thing we discussed is having all the site plans for 13 x 13 decks attached to the Basic deck plans so they would be
(conditionally)pre-approved. That way,any of the residents who wanted a permit for a 13 x 13 deck as shown could
walk in with an application and walk out with a permit.
If an applicant wanted to go for a larger deck(for whatever reason),they would need to apply separately with drawings
&site plans, and undergo land use and building permit review. If they were encroaching into the 25'setback from the
Lake's OHM,they would also need to provide verification that there had been a previous permit and final approval of a
deck of that size.
I believe I have enough information in what you have given me to attach to the "master plan", unless you have different
or more detailed site plans I should use.
The condition on the permits will read something like: "Repair or replacement of a deck up to 13'x 13'in size will not
require additional land use review and approval,and will maintain nonconforming status with regard to setback from
the OHM of Lake Easter."
Any changes/repairs to decks will trigger compliance with current International Building Code requirements.
1
Grace Skidmore
To: w mcdaniel
Subject: Lake Easter Estates-Deck Repair/Replacement
Hello William-
This is to clarify one of the conditions of approval for the proposed deck repair"Basic"plan,specifically item(4)relative
to nonconformance.
The Zoning Code differentiates between legal and illegal nonconformances based on whether or not the improvement
was in compliance with regulations in place at the time of construction and required permits and approvals were
obtained. Illegal nonconformances are theoretically required to be immediately abated;however,that is impractical in
application. When work is performed on a nonconforming improvement that requires a building permit,the City
becomes aware of the problem and would then require the nonconformance to be corrected as part of the approval
process.
Routine maintenance of existing improvements that would not require a building permit include such tasks as pressure
washing,cosmetic repairs,painting,etc.where no aspect of the structure regulated by adopted Building Codes is
impacted(eg.structural members,required guardrails,etc.).
Let me know if you need additional information or clarification.
Development Specialist
(253)835-2607 or(253)835-2624
Fax: (253)835-2609
1