Laserfiche WebLink
. �.. <br /> ��'� PLANN/N6 AND <br /> Allan Gi('en <br /> ` ��'''�� COil�fif�UN/TY OEf�ELOPA�IENT L"-y"` <br /> :�- <br /> 1:" . <br /> September 8, 2004 <br /> Craig DilworthlCarolyn Rygg � h{ ��f�� v `� D <br /> 3225 Shore Avenue u u <br /> Everett, WA 98203 5EP 1• e Z004 <br /> RE: 3301 Shore Avenue Deck Addition <br /> ............................ ..... ............. <br /> CITY OF EVERETT <br /> Dear Mr. Dilworth and Ms. Rygg: Enginenrinp�Pnhiic snrvices <br /> This letler is in response to the letler the Cily received from you daled August 30, 2004 <br /> regarding a building addi'.ion occurring at 3301 Shore Avenue. The City has prepared a <br /> response for each of the three issues you have raised; these responses are outiined <br /> below. <br /> • Concern #1: Inadequate Exits. <br /> Findinq: The proposed deck is still under construction. The plans initially approved <br /> by the City provided for an entry into the house, however revised plans now show a <br /> direct access to grade from the deck. This obviates the 30"wide portion of deck <br /> from being a required means of egress. Since the required means o(egress does <br /> nol pass through this pertion o( Ihe deck, there are no minimum widlh reouirements, <br /> and any referenre to Chapter 10 does not apply. <br /> Conclusion: No code violation exists. <br /> • Concern #2: The side deck exceeds 36" in height. <br /> Findinq: The grade under ihe northern deck within the side yard setback siopes from <br /> the high point to the east �approx 18" to grade), to the lowest point to the west <br /> (approx. 36" to grade). In question is only the leading edge of the deck al the <br /> extreme western edge. OtherNise staled - the entire portion of the deck east of lhe <br /> western edge localed wilhin the side yard set back is well under the maximum <br /> allowable height of 3G'. <br /> Existing grade under the extreme western edge cannot be unquestionably <br /> determined a! this time as it was necessarily dislurbed for the construction of the <br /> footing. <br /> fvleasurements were re-�aken on September 1, 2004; the height of the deck as built <br /> is well within prevailing construclion standards and accepted interpretations by the <br /> Ciry of EveretL The fact that the westemmost edge could be measured at points to <br /> be marginally greater than 36" is irrelevant. <br /> Conclusion: No code violations exist. <br /> �y/zu <br /> rirv nc�vcocrr . ���� �.,_.__ _ , . .. .. _ . _ <br />