My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2330 MELVIN AVE 2025-01-27
>
Address Records
>
MELVIN AVE
>
2330
>
2330 MELVIN AVE 2025-01-27
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/27/2025 2:31:20 PM
Creation date
12/10/2024 3:02:34 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Address Document
Street Name
MELVIN AVE
Street Number
2330
Imported From Microfiche
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
40
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
1111 i <br /> otherwise being created, is it possible to obtain a variance of the minimum ceiling height to allow <br /> ceiling heights of no less than 6'7" in the habitable areas (the two bedrooms) of the basement and <br /> no less than 6'4"elsewhere in the basement? WAC 51-51-4502(R4502.l) expressly contemplates <br /> "approved alternative arrangements" in setting forth the general guidelines for making alterations <br /> I. to existing structures. As indicated herein, if my clients are required to meet the 6'8" minimum <br /> ceiling height, it will potentially cost up to $200,000 more than if they were allowed to keep the <br /> ceiling at its current height...a difference of less than one inch. Without a very minor variance as <br /> an `approved alternative arrangement,' my clients simply will not be able to afford to make the <br /> extraordinary alterations. <br /> In addition to the basement ceiling height,it appears it is the City's position that the bottom <br /> sill of the basement bedroom windows are too high and that the stairwell from the main floor to <br /> the basement does not meet current Code requirements. It is my clients' belief that windows <br /> always existed in the location where the basement bedroom windows currently are and that the <br /> original windows did not open. It is further believed that the previous owner replaced those non- <br /> opening windows with windows of the same size, in the same location, and with new windows <br /> that open to the outside. Accordingly, although the work was unpermitted, the new windows <br /> brought the home into greater compliance with the Code and made the home safer. It appears that <br /> the replacement windows fall within the provisions of WAC 51-51-4502(R4502.5 through <br /> R4502.5.5) and may not need to be lowered. Similarly, the stairwell between the first floor and <br /> the basement living area is reasonably believed to be in its original location and that the previous <br /> owner made minor cosmetic and safety alterations, at most, to the stairwell and that it should not <br /> be required to comply with the standards set for new construction per R4504.7 through R4504.7.6. <br /> Based upon the foregoing and in consideration of the fact that Arturo Juarez and Elvia <br /> Nicasio are the victims of fraud perpetrated by the previous owner and that the potential cost of <br /> remedial work is insurmountably high, my clients request an official opinion as to the following <br /> questions: <br /> 1) Is a minimum basement ceiling height 6'7" for the two bedrooms sufficient under <br /> these unique circumstances? <br /> 2) Is a minimum basement ceiling height of 6'4" sufficient for all other areas of the <br /> basement under these unique circumstances? <br /> 1 <br /> The Hembree Law Firm,PLLC 4. <br /> 21 Avenue A,Suite C,Snohomish,WA.98290 ` „ <br /> e r <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.