4841 GLENWOOD AVE 2021-06-09 - Laserfiche WebLink

• • December 28, 2015 To Code Enforcement, On December 14, 2015 I inspected the property at 4841 Glenwood based on a complaint of a failing retaining wall. My initial inspection revealed that the driveway being supported by the retaining wall appears to be in stable condition, but the wall is vertical in several places(a batter is a requirement of the design). Inspections of the records show that neither the house(permit C0601-007) nor the retaining walls(permit PW0601-006) have ever received approval—and all permits have expired. The house has been lived in but is currently vacant. I propose that the structure be posted as"Unlawful Structure" as stated in Section 108.1.4 of the IPMC. I further propose that an Order be drafted to direct the owner to secure a C of 0 for the house and final approval for the wall and Public Works permit. • Everett Residential Code (ERC)Section R113.1 states that it shall be unlawful for any person, firm or corporation to erect, construct, alter, extend, repair, move, remove, demolish or occupy any building, structure or equipment regulated by this code, or cause came to be done in conflict with or in violation of any of the provisions of this code. • ERC Section R105.5 states that every permit issued shall become invalid if abandoned for a period of 180 days after the work is commenced. • ERC Section R110.1 states that no building or structure shall be used or occupied until the building official has issued a certificate of occupancy therefore as provided herein. On December 17th I inspected the property again with Steve Miller,Associate Engineer P.E.from our office and we both examined the western ecology block retaining wall from above and from below. The wall showed definite signs of settling. The wall also has no visual batter as required by this type of design. Ground at the top of the wall and at the toe of the wall also shows signs of settling and movement. Further research of our records on the wall provided additional information: • The wall is higher than the 4 feet maximum permitted as per the approved site plan. • The extent and layout of the driveway and ecology block retaining wall exceed what was approved per the site plan. • A letter is in our files from JRR Engineering dated September 30,2009 that confirms that the wall is not built correctly. • Per our records,the wall has never received final approval. • The wall has previously failed in 2007 and was repaired, but not approved. Additional review of the records of the structure has revealed the following: • The fire apparatus access road is not constructed as per the approved site plan.