The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1902 W 5th St - BuildingPREPARED 10/21/09 8 13 15 INSPECTION TICKET PAGE 1 CITY OF PORT ANGELES INSPECTOR JAMES LIERLY DATE 10/21/09 ADDRESS 1902 W 5TH ST SUBDIV CONTRACTOR TOPNOTCH ROOFING GUTTER PHONE (360) 457 0066 OWNER LINDQUIST JACQUELINE M PHONE (360) 565 8019 PARCEL 06 30 00 9 0 0200 0000 APPL NUMBER 09 00001087 RE ROOF PERMIT BNOP 00 BUILDING PERMIT NO PR FEE REQUESTED INSP DESCRIPTION TYP /SQ COMPLETED RESULT RESULTS /COMMENTS BL99 01 10/21/09 LL BLDG FINAL October 21 2009 8 12 19 AM 1pangrle BLDG FINAL RE ROOF GARAGE COMMENTS AND NOTES Application Number Application pin number Property Address ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER Application type description Subdivision Name Property Use Property Zoning Application valuation Application desc TEAR OFF /INSTALL COMP Owner LINDQUIST JACQUELINE M 1902 WEST 5TH STREET PORT ANGELES WA 98362 (360) 565 8019 Permit BUILDING PERMIT Additional desc TEAR OFF /INSTALL Permit pin number 155408 Permit Fee 109 75 Issue Date 10/20/09 Expiration Date 4/18/10 Qty Unit Charge Per 1 00 Other Fees Fee summary Permit Fee Total Plan Check Total Other Fee Total Grand Total T:Forms/Building Division/Building Permit CITY OF PORT ANGELES DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT BUILDING DIVISION 32] EAST 5TH STREET PORT ANGELES WA 98362 09 00001087 193658 1902 W 5TH ST 06 30 00 9 0 0200 0000 RE ROOF RS7 RESDNTL SINGLE FAMILY 2994 Contractor NO PR FEE COMP BASE FEE 14 0000 THOU BL -2001 25K (14 PER K) STATE SURCHARGE Charged Paid Credited 109 75 109 75 00 00 00 00 4 50 4 50 00 114 25 114 25 00 Date 10/20/09 TOPNOTCH ROOFING GUTTER 1235 W 9TH PORT ANGELES (360) 457 0066 WA 98362 Plan Check Fee 00 Valuation 2994 Due Extension 95 75 14 00 4 50 00 00 00 00 Ri a (o-2/_c Separate Permits are required for electrical work, SEPA, Shoreline, ESA, utilities, private and public improvements. This permit becomes null and void if work or construction authorized is not commenced within 180 days, if construction or work is suspended or abandoned fora period of 180 days after the work has commenced, or if required inspections have not been requested within 180 days from the last inspection. I hereby certify that I have read and examined this application and know the same to be true and correct. All provisions of laws and ordinances governing this type of work will be complied with whether specified herein or not. The granting of a permit does not presume to give authority to violate or cancel the provisions of any state or local law regulating construction or the performance of construction. .AL -1 of ),c r L�(/✓ Da4e Print Name Signature of Contractor or Authorized Agent V Signature of Owner Of owner is builder) BUILDING PERMIT INSPECTION RECORD 0 .-9 PLEASE PROVIDE A MINIMUM 24 -HOUR NOTICE FOR INSPECTIONS Building Inspections 417 4815 Electrical Inspections 417 4735 Public Works Utilities 417 4831 Backflow Prevention Inspections 417 4886 GO IT IS UNLAWFUL TO COVER, INSULATE OR CONCEAL ANY WORK BEFORE INSPECTED AND ACCEPTED POST PERMIT IN CONSPICUOUS LOCATION. KEEP PERMIT AND APPROVED PLANS AT JOB SITE. Inspection Type Date Accepted By Comments FOUNDATION Footings Stemwall Foundation Drainage Downspouts Piers Post Holes (Pole Bldgs PLUMBING Under Floor Slab Rough -In Water Line (Meter to Bldg) Gas Line Back Flow Water AIR SEAL. Walls Ceiling FRAMING Joists Girders Under Floor Shear Wall Hold Downs Walls Roof Ceiling Drywall (Interior Braced Panel Only) T -Bar INSULATION. Slab Wall Floor Ceiling MECHANICAL. Heat Pump Furnace FAU Ducts Rough -In Gas Line Wood Stove Pellet Chimney Commercial Hood Ducts MANUFACTURED HOMES Footing Slab Blocking Hold Downs Skirting PLANNING DEPT Separate Permit #s SEPA. Parking Lighting I ESA. Landscaping I SHORELINE. T:Forms /Building Division /Building Permit FINAL Date Accepted by FINAL Date Accepted by FINAL INSPECTIONS REQUIRED PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY/ USE Inspection Type Electrical 417 -4735 Construction R.W PW Engineering 417 -4831 Fire 417 -4653 Planning 417 -4750 Building 417 -4815 Date Accepted By 1 0 -7-1- Oq 13�L Applicant or Agent 7 Property Owner -1` k q„ „�k;' Property Owner's Addres Contractor /Engineer Contractor /Engineer's A License PROJECT ADDRESS Parcel Number Project Tvpe Brief Description. Check all that apply New Construction Addition Remodel Repair 4 Re -roof Demolition Heat System Other Floor Areas Basement 1 Floor 2nd Floor 3 Floor Garage Carport Covered Porch Deck Shed Other Total footprint of structures BUILDING PERMIT CITY OF PORT ANGELES Attn Building Permit Technician 321 E. Fifth St. Port Angeles WA 98362 (360) 417 -4815 fax (360) 417 -4711 mks) t P4 61- U 9 t,. dress 5 t/.." 4 al 4 Heat pump wood burning stove gas fireplace pellet stove other Existing (sq. ft.) Max. height of proposed structures Will a lawn sprinkler system be installed? Will a fire sprinkler system be installed? Residential Proposed (sq. ft.) ft. Occupancy group Occupant load Construction type APPLICATION Print in ink For City Use Only' ?Eate Receivedds Fermit /[7,} 'ate Approved /O .0-e 7 5 5 Phone 4 440 Phone lve A Phone o/S T -4,0 6 ,6 P A- 4 k 1 .4.3 Expires Commercial Multi- family Industrial .2,, /i1i.." per sq ft. 0 Lot Zoning TOTAL VALUATION sq ft. Lot size sq ft. Lot coverage of bedrooms of full baths of half baths L Ok I have read and completed this application and know it to be true and correct. I am authorized to apply for this permit and understand that it is my responsibility to determine what permits are required, and to obtain permits prior to working on projects. Date u 4- 4 Print Name '9 (4, to 1i lw� Signature C ti Buildin Division/Bldg g Idg Permit Appl. 2006 Code.doc 10/3/09 One layer of composition roofing to be torn off $2994 00 251.50 $3245 50 $336 00 28.28 $364.28 topnotchroofing@qwestoffice.net T PNORG994DA EXPIRATION DATE: 5/18/10 Company signatufP r V Date 3 Bid prices are subject to reasonable increases due to any necessary alterations, additions, increases in material and /or labor to complete work. Homeowner will be notified of any necessary changes, which may affect cost. Property owners are responsible for obtaining any permits required for work and materials described herein. TOPNOTCH is happy to provide permit, but will add the cost to the final bill. Bid prices are applicable for 30 days* from date below, unless otherwise stated or agreed to. Please feel welcome to call If you have questions concerning this estimate /bid. If bid is accepted, please sign one copy and return it to TOPNOTCH ROOFING GUTTER, at the address above. Work is scheduled upon receipt of sinned bid. Verbal agreements will not Guarantee scheduled work. References are available! ESTIMATE AND BID PROPOSAL CONTRACT TO Jackie Lindquist 1902 W 5 St Port Angeles WA 98363 460 4924 FOR' Re -roof garage C same address Gutter installation for garage Tear off existing roofing Clean up and disposal included Roof with 30 -year laminated, architectural Composition over 30# felt Install 70' of drip edge starter course composition skylight flash 32' of Z ridge, skylight flashing Estimated cost of tear off and re -roof, using the materials specified, labor to complete work as described and sales tax Gutter installation: Remove old gutters, dispose. Install 5" aluminum, continuous gutter, downspouts And accessories. Material labor and sales tax' Authorized party to accept bid Date ,f l,? r --,-n- MATERIAL WARRANTY BY MANUFACTURER, WOR GUARANTEED BY LICENSED, BONDED, INSURED CONTRACTOR Work aanshin warranty does not cover .ter:rtions, lack of maintenance, or imaroner maintenance, etc. PAYMENT TERMS: ONE HALF TO START WORK. BALANCE DUE IN FULL WHEN trifORK IS COMPLETED ALTERNATIVE PAYMENT ARRANGEMENTS MUST SE DISCUSSED AND AGREED TO PRIOR' TO THE START OF THE JOB Application Number Application pin number Property Address ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER Application type description Subdivision Name Property Use Property Zoning Application valuation Application desc install drive approach Owner LINDQUIST JACQUELINE M 1902 WEST 5TH STREET PORT ANGELES (360) 565 8019 Permit Additional desc Permit pin number Permit Fee Issue Date Expiration Date Fee summary Permit Fee Total Plan Check Total Grand Total T•\Policies \1102.15R [1/05] WA RIGHT OF WAY 133561 50 00 9/04/08 3/03/09 CITY OF PORT ANGELES PUBLIC WORKS UTILITIES DIVISION 321 EAST 5TH STREET PORT ANGELES, WA 98362 08 00001095 727635 1902 W 5TH ST 06 30 00 9 0 0200 0000 PUBLIC WORKS UTILITES RS7 RESDNTL SINGLE FAMILY 0 Contractor A J WEBB CONSTRUCTION CO 300 WEBB RD 98362 SEQUIM (360) 683 7121 Qty Unit Charge Per 1 00 50 0000 ECH RIGHT OF WAY PERMIT Charged Paid Credited 50 00 50 00 00 00 00 00 50 00 50 00 00 9/ Contractor or Authorized Agent Date Plan Check Fee Valuation Date 9/04/08 WA 98382 Due 00 0 Extension 50 00 00 00 00 Separate Permits are required for electrical work, SEPA, Shoreline, ESA, utilities, private and public improvements. This permit becomes null and void if work or construction authorized is not commenced within 180 days, if construction or work is suspended or abandoned for a period of 180 days after the work as commenced, or if required inspections have not been requested within 180 days from the last inspection. I hereby certify that I have read and examined this application and know the same to be true and correct. All provisions of laws and ordinances governing this type of work will be complied with whether specified herein or not. The granting of a permit does not presume to give J authority to violate or cancel the provisions of any state or local law regulating construction or the performance of construc Signature of Owner (if owner is builder) Date CALL 417 -4807 FOR UTILITY INSPECTIONS. PLEASE PROVIDE A MINIMUM 24 HOUR NOTICE. IT IS UNLAWFUL TO COVER, INSULATE OR CONCEAL ANY WORK BEFORE INSPECTED AND ACCEPTED. POST PERMIT IN A CONSPICUOUS LOCATION KEEP PERMIT CARD AND APPROVED PLANS AT JOB SITE SITE EROSIONCONTROL PARKING SIDEWALK CURB.& GUTTER .DRIVEWAY,APPROACH BACK -FLOW DEVICE T`\Policies \1102.15R'[ 1/05]S' INSPECTION TYPE DATE ACCEPTED YES I NO PW UTILITIES (Engineering Division) WATERLINE METER SEWER'CONNECTION S ANITARY STORM SITE DRAINAGE RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION RW PW/,' ENGINEERING 'FIRE PLANNING DEPT BUILDING 417 -4807 417 -4653 I 417 -4750 417 -4815 PERMIT INSPECTION RECORD FINAL INSPECTIONS REQUIRED PRIORTO OCCUPANCY/USE DATE YES' NO` COMMERCIAL 'CONSTRUCTION RW PW ENGINEERING I :FIREDEPT. I PLANNING DEPT BUILDING COMMENTS DATE'= ti AACCEPTED YES NO ASSOCIATES INCORPORATED October 20 2003 Mr Brad Collins Director City of Port Angeles Department of Community Development 321 East Fifth Street Port Angeles, WA 98362 Dear Brad Sincerely Track Gudgel P E.) fll E r OcT22 rr•; ClT t OF 'KEANGaLES r Tt V n e!ooru= ,F SUBJECT Lindquist Residence at 1902 West 5th Street, Port Angeles ENGINEERING tAND'r OVEYING. At the request of Jacqui Lindquist, a site inspection of the residence was performed to determine the height of the structure relative to a benchmark, established by Lou Haehnlan of the City of Port Angeles, as the average height of the lot. Based on this benchmark, the maximum height to the twelve foot section of ridge in question was determined to be 29' -9' The benchmark established by Lou consisted of some flagging placed on the ground approximately 3 south of the existing curb cut, which now serves the new garage This flagged benchmark was located very near a crack in the curb The flagging is no longer present and the grade appears to be worn down at the location due to construction traffic. Lou showed me the benchmark when I accompanied him during a foundation inspection He did this in case of any questions arose in the future since I was to serve as the interim building inspector after he left the City of Port Angeles For some background information concerning the building height shown on the plans the issue was brought up during the permit process The maximum allowable height of the residence was discussed with Lou since the plans actually showed a building height of 32' -6' I believe Lou documented the maximum allowable height of 30' prior to issuance of the permit. The benchmark was established by Lou at the beginning of construction at the request of the contractor K3 Construction and the owner so that the 30 height restriction would not be exceeded With this benchmark established the building could be modified during construction to not exceed the allowable height. During construction the height of the second story was reduced by one foot and the roof pitch adjusted to not exceed this maximum height based on the benchmark established It should be noted that the finish grade of the site has yet to be determined with at least 6' to 12' of material to be placed on the existing grade Due to the fact that Lou Haehnlan of the City of Port Angeles established a benchmark, it seems very unfair that the City is now questioning the height of the structure All efforts were made to comply with the height requirement including lowering the second floor wall height and adjusting the roof pitch based on the benchmark. Based on the benchmark established by the City of Port Angeles representative the height of the building does not exceed the allowable 30 maximum 519 South Peabody Street, Suite 22 Port Angeles,Washington 98362 (360) 417 -0501 Fax (360) 417 -0514 E -mail. zenovtc@olympus.net fc. JN 02247 0 N CITY OF PORT ANGELES DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT - BUILDING DIVISION 321 EAST 5TH STREET, PORT ANGELES, WA 98362 BUILDING PERMIT ISSUED: 10/24/2002 PERMIT NO: 13800 OWNER/APPLICANT PROPERTY LOCATION 1902 5TH ST W JACQUELINE LINDQUIST 1902 W 5TH STREET Lot: 1 & 2 & VAC ST Port Angeles, WA 98362 Block: 2 [] Long Legal 360/683-4104 Subdivision: ALDWELLS SD OF SUB LT 35 T: S: Parcel No: 063000900200000 CONTRACTOR ARCHITECT OWNER N/A VARIOUS Port Angeles, WA 99360 , 98360-0000 206/000-0000 360/000-0000 PROJECT INFO Project Value: $500.00 SFD Units: 0 Commercial: 0 Project Type: DEMOLITION SFD SQ FT: 0 Industrial: 0 Occupancy Type: RESIDENTIAL Garage: 0 Occupancy Group: MFD Units: 0 Construction Type: MFD SQ FT: 0 Zoning Use: PROJECT NOTES DEMO EXISTING SFR RECEIPTg9841 FEES ASSESSMENT Building Permit: $23.50 Misc Fee 1: $0.00 Plan Check: 0.00 Misc Fee 2: $0.00 State Surcharge: ~4.50 Misc Fee 3: $0.00 House Moving: ~0.00 Manufactured Home: ~0.00 Sign: ~0.00 TOTAL FEE: $28.00 Plumbing: ~0.00 AMOUNT PAID: $28.00 Mechanical: ;0.00 BALANCE DUE: $0.00 Radon: ;0.00 Separate Permits are required for electrical work, SEPA, Shoreline, ESA, utilities, private and public improvements. This permit becomes null and void if work or construction authorized is not commenced within 180 days, if construction or work is suspended or abandoned for a period of 180 days after the work as commenced or f required inspections have not been requested w th n 180 days from the lasl inspection I hereby ced fy that I have read and examined this app cation and know the same to be true and correct. All provisions of laws and ordinances governing this fype of work will be complied with whether specified herein or not. The granting of a permit does not cProenSs~rmucetitcOn~iVe authority to violate or cancel the provisions of any state or local law regulating construction or the performance of Signature of Contractor or Authorized Agent Date 'gnature of Owner (if owner is b~lder) Date T:\PLANNTNG\FORMS\ I 102.15 [4/2002] BUILDING PERMIT INSPECTION RECORD CALL 417-4815 FOR BUILDING INSPECTIONS. PLEASE PROVIDE A MINIMUM 24 HOUR NOTICE. ITIS UNLAWFUL TO COVER, INSULATE OR CONCEAL ANY WORK BEFORE INSPECTED AND ACCEPTED. POST PERMIT IN A CONSPICUOUS LOCATION. KEEP PERMIT CARD AND APPROVED PLANS AT JOB SITE INSPECTION TYPE DATE [ ACCEPTED COMMENTS YES I NO FOUNDATION: #00TiNGS WALLS FOUNDATION DRAINAGE ELECTRICAL (LIGHT DEPT) SEPARATE PERMIT: # PLUMBING UNDER FLOOR / SLAB ROUGH-IN WAIER LINE GAS LINE BACK FLOW / WATER AIR SEAL WALLS CEILING FRAMING JOISTS / GIRDERS SHEAR WALL WALLS / ROOF / CEILING DRYWALL T-EAR INSULATION WALL / FLOOR/CEILING MECHANICAL HEAT PUMP WOOD STOVE / PELLET / CHIMNEY HOOD / DUCTS PW UTILITIES / SITE WORK (Engineedng Division) SEPARATE PERMIT #'s: WATERLINE / METER SEWER CONNECTION SANITARY STORM PLANNING DEPT. SEPARATE PERMIT #'s SEPA: PARKING/LIGHTING ESA: LANDSCAPING SHORELINE: FINAL INSPECTIONS REQUIRED PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY/USE RESIDENTIAL DATE YES NO COMMERCIAL DATE ACCEPTED YES NO ELECTRICAL - LIGHT DEPT. 417-4735 ELECTRICAL LIGHT DEPT CONSTRUCTION R.W. / PW/ CONSTRUCTION - R.W. ENGINEERING 417~4807 PW / ENGINEERING FIRE 417-4653 FIRE DEPT. PLANNING DEPT. 417-4750 PLANNING DEPT. BUILDING 417-4815 f' 1~'O '5 ~'~H BUILDING T:\PLANNINGkFORMS\ 1102.15 [4/2002] CITY OF PORT ANGELES DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ........... INSPECTION REPORT ........... REQUEST: Date Q/~ /0 ~ ~ '~*'-~ Time // :~-~,17], Received by ~J~ Location of Work to, be inspected / ~'/~ Name of person requ~.;sting inspection Address of person reciuesting inspection Type of Inspection (~:ircle appropriate one): Permit No. Sewer Foundation Framing Chimney Plumbin~Final ~ewerExcav. Other INSPECTION NOTES: Inspected: Date ~ ,- Time By Remarks: RESTORATION REQUIRED ...... YES NO. SURFACE RESTORATION: SURFACE TYPE: [] Unimproved []Gravel r-~Asphalt J-]PCC ~lOther [] Repaired by City Work Order # [] Repaired by Permittee [] COMPLETE []No Damage Found [] INCOMPLETE (Continue on reverse side if necessary) STREET SUPERINTENDENT (DATE) ,~ .... CITY OF PORT ANGELES PUBLIC WORKS - ELECTRICAL DIVISION 321 EAST 5TH STREET. PORT ANGELES. WA 98362 ELECTRICAL PERMIT ISSUED: 6/25/2002 PERMIT NO 7706 OWNER/APPLICANT PROPERTY LOCATION JACKIE LINDQUIST 1902 5TH ST W 1902 W 5TH STREET Lot: 1 & 2 & VAC ST Port Angeles, WA 98362 Block: 2 [] Long Legal 360/683-4104 Subdivision: ALDWELLS SD OF SUB LT 35 T: S: Parcel No: 063000900200000 CONTRACTOR ARCHITECT JARMUTH ELECTRIC N/A P.O. BOX 635 SEQUIM, WA 98382 , 98360-0000 360/683-4104 360/000-0000 PROJECT INFO Project Type: RES. MISC. Project Value: $0.00 Occupancy Type: RESIDENTIAL Construction Type: Occupancy Group: Zoning Use: Electrical Heat: [] Baseboard 0 KW [] Riser [] Underground Service [] Furnace 0 KW [] Overhead Service Voltage: 120,240 [] Heat Pump 0 KW [] TempService Phase: [] 1 [] 3 [] Fan Wall 0 KW Service Size: 320 Feeder Size: 0 PROJECT NOTES ADD 3 CIRUITS TO GARAGE RECEIPT~9124 FEES ASSESSMENT Service: $0.00 Additional Feeders: $0.00 Circuit Wiring: $92.30 Temp Service: $0.00 Misc Fee: $0.00 TOTAL FEE: $92.30 AMOUNT PAID: $92.30 BALANCE DUE $0.00 COMMENTS/ACTION NEEDED ELECTRICAL PERMIT INSPECTION RECORD CALL 417~1735 FOR ELECTRICAL INSPECTIONS. PLEASE PROVIDE A MINIMUM 24 HOUR NOTICE. IT IS UNLAWFUL TO COVER, INSULATE OR CONCEAL ANY WORK BEFORE IT IS INSPECTED AND ACCEPTED. KEEP PER/vflT CARD AND APPROVED PIAkNS AT JOB SITE 7~0~:2~ I DITCH ROUGH-IN / COVER SERVICE GENERAL COMMENTS: _PW-I IOZ 15 [,v961 AppHcationNumber Property Address .. ASSESSOR PARCEL NuMBER : Application. description Subdiv'isionName ProPerty Zoning . . . AppHcationvalllation 03.00000100 1902, W.5TH ST, 06-30-00-9-0-0209-0000:" RES NEW SFR 300000 Contractor -~-_.'-------~-------~--- ------------------~----- K 3 CONSTRUCTION P.O. BOX 3835 , SEQUIf02 . (360)683-4059 ----...; stpctureInforIl\ation NEW 2363 SQ. F'l'. sn .. . CcmstructionType .. . . . . TYPE V NON~R.A,TED Occupancy Type " . . . . SmGLE PAM &. CONGREGATES Other strUct info. . . . .- NUMBER OF UNITS LINDQUIST JACQUELINE M ,18.2'>ROSIj: ,LN , . PORT.. ANGELES WA98382 1.00. , ,,-, '- ,: " :' ~ -- --;,--,,-" ~,,~,--- --...... -7;",~ --- -- -....... ~... ,-" --.... ~ -.. ---'';'.",":'';''' --~~,~ -.~,_~__-'-............ --,~" -- -- --.... Permit . . . . Additional. desc I'ermit Fee Issue Date Expiration Date ELECTRICAL NEW RESIDENTIAL 94.80 6/11/03 12/08/03 Plan. Check Fee Val:uation . . ,00 O. , ........ --'. ~,-'~"''''' ---.-.. -~-~:":"_...... -,-"",;, '-". --- --...... --.. "-,,---';'';''.. --.. -- _.~:,,",.-,-:-'---~~,~,- ~ ~'-'- --........ Unit.Charge Per 94.8000.ECH Other. Fees STATE SURCHARGE 4.50. . Charged Paid Credited Permit Fee Total . Plan Check Total Other Fee Total Grand Total 94.80 .00 4.50 99;30 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00. .Op ~------- .-,..,.-c....,.:",.. ....,....,.,. .,--:'- .,:-~,:,- "".: . -~F"'~,\":,'l;~,:~-_,,..,:::---- () 1~i ~ . ~ CALL 417-4815 FOR BUILDING INSPEctioNS.PLEASB PROVIDE A MINIMOM 24liQYR NC>TIqE."lt)S'UNU WFUf1'()COf/JlR," . INSULATEOIfCONCEAL A,NY WORJ{ BliFQ.RE INSPECTED ANDACCEPTED. POS'f PERMIT IN A CQNSPICUOPS LOCATION: . ". ." .., ...J KEEP PERMIT:CA,RD AND APPROVED P4AN~'~T!Q~ SITE' \ BUILDING PERMIT'INSPECTION RECORD t ," ~ )'.J" - . , INSPECTION TYPE DATE I ;..:' ACCEPTED '~;;, YES . NO , . " . '." - - .' I .~ ,: '? c,;~' - ----, , . . .' 'FOUNDATION: FOOTINGS . .' . '. .:..' .':' .'. OJ 1't;/;I_ . " , . , - ~- ",:., :.- . . "- . ,. /N~l>N' Ok , . A;_ -. '1;;,:;. / /-(:)7 , WALLS fOUNDATION ELECTR.ICAL ROUGlI-IN PLUMBING UNDERFLOORISLAB .' . DRAINAGE (LIGHT DEPT) SEPARATE PERMIT: # .., . I I . BACK FLOW I WATER AIR SEAL C'': " WAiLS CEILING " FRAMING JOIs:rS! GIRDERS - i:: --r""'" I " , ,I , , . . I I 1 , ::. '. -;-; ::"., ,'., . : :' .c, -- '. .' ROUGH~IN ". --,- WATERLINE' GAS LINE . ,-- '. .. '. "'.,'. . , . .'" - . ..' '. .' Si-IEAR WALL. .' J{A1-LS I ROOF I CEILING . DRVW ALL " SLAB WALL! FLooRI CEILING M':>~HANICAL .' r REA T PUMP ,I ..'" '. I . -- I I I , T-BAR INSULATION . . . WOOD S'rpVE /PELLET ICHIMNEY HOOD/DUCTS PW UTILITIES i SITE WORK WATERLINE / METER SEWER. CONNECTION ... .." - {Engineeritlg Di~sion) SEPARA'I]: PERMIT #'s: . . - , ELEctRICAL :LIGlrrDEPT. <, , CONStRUCTIONR.W./PW/ E,NGINEERING '" " i .. I .' j I I SHOREL~: .! . l,'.. FINAlJ.INSl'ECT10N.S REQUIRED !,R,IOI.bT90~.C;;U.ft.\l"if,Yl\t~~' ,'. .,C" .r.~0> <) ,\. .'JDA.l'E/i' YES ,.NO(>.... <:;Q!\fMER~!t\L, .... D~T.F,-'i_"i;~^S.~E(>TEDc' '. Ii'" '.__ ')'''...1', .'i',:.";'. .'. '. 'evEs>", . '.' NO ){417-'1735 , 1'......'Z....:.~..:......J".!i'~.....# .." ~-:- ." ELttiiJtib.tii1""'f ...... ..'D,--':-'I) . , . Vt..Jjl'7.. ..6-rf./" ., L1Gm;DEPT.; .... .......'" . . ." -, .; CONsTRUCTION~R.W. '''il>/'''.'' .... PW !ENG~ERING \ SANITARY STORM .' '. '.' PLANNING DEPT. SEI'ARA TE PERMIT #'$ SEPA: . .' E$A: P~RKINGILIGHTING .' __ LANDSCAl'llI!G . o. '. .... ; Ie- ..' .H----c, '/"; '7' '7 RF;SID~NTIAL - . .FlRE . ". 417-4807 , . 417.4653 i~ 's, .h 417-4750 , ,..; I..' . .- ....... ". ......-- 417-4815 --,- T:\PLANNING\FORMS\1102.15 [412002] BUILDING' -- .'. . ,',.. FIRE DEPT. .... 'PLANNi/I!~pEI'T;'st: BUILDING '. " .. ...... '" PLANNING DEPT. I . ~:. ,..1", . .,:' ,!< -.' ' . . . '-:'. . : . :: '.. '. "" ,';"i;':f:~ '~". . ,-'. ' ............ ~~ CITY pF PO}{T:ANGELES ' .. , DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT' - BUILDING DIVISION , '321 EAST 5TH STREET,' PORT'~GgLESfWA 98362 ",' ,', ',. /.ji ,';' '~)'-\~" ,<.,. '. '\"-yr:-' ,j'~~,,? Application'Nwnber propertY.Acidress 'AS'SESSORl?ARcELNUMBER:, ' Application description Subdivision Name 'property zoning. . . Application valuation . :03;00000100 1902 W 5TH ST 06:'36- 00- 9- 0- 0200-0000-- RE~( NEW SFR 300000 Contractor ..', , ------------------------ LDlDQtriSTJACQUELINE M '. i96r'}lEST~'5TH STREET i ,~. , ' PoRTol\NGELES WA 98362 " .' (~69),~ 5,65:-:8019 ..' " ..' .:.----- Structure Information Construction Type'. . . . Occupancy Type . . . ~ . Other struct info'. . . . K 3 CONStrRUCTJ:ON '.r',',",:(~l,.:.~, ""'.' '. '. ,...."1,"'->?,"'",',. " ~;. P:.O.BOX3835 SEQUIM. . (360) 683-4059 NEw 2363 'S{2':FT'.'SFR' .".. ,. TYPE V.NON-RATED SINGLE P~,&; CONGREGATES ' NUMBER OPWITS WA 98382 1.00 . . ",' ,. . ' " " - - - --------- - - - -- - -- - - - - - - - - - "':' - - - -- -- - - - - - ~ -r-: -,- ;,,","":'."":'-:":":,- -v-: - -- - ...'- -'''' -.... -.. - -- -: - - -- Permit Additionaldesc Pe~t' Pee Issue Date .:"Exi\lration Date , ELECTRICAL, NEW RESID~IAL 184.30 7/15/03' . '1/12/04:' Plan ChJt::k Pee Valuation ..00 o EL-R-SQPT PIRST. :1300'':'" EL-R-SQFT AI)DJ:TJ:ONAL.500. , ' E?Ctension 70.80 113.50 ---------_._----~---~--~--------~----.-----'---~~-~~-----~-~-~--------------~~- . .: . . '. STATE. SURCHARGE 4.50' Charged Paid Credited Due ---------- ---------- ---------- - - -'- - - - -.- 184.30 184.30 ,00 .00 '.00' .00 .00 .00, 4.50 4.50 .00 .00 188.80 3,88.80 .()O '.00, T:\PLANNING\fORMS\1102.15 [412002] ! BUILDING PERMIT INSPECTION RECORD CALL 417-4815 FOR BUILDING INSPECTIONS. PLEASE PROVIDE A MINIMUM 24 HOUR NOTICE. ITIS UNLAWFUL TO COVER, INSULA TE OR CONCEAL ANY WORK BEFORE INSPECTED AND ACCEPTED. POST PERMIT IN A CONSPICUOUS LOCATION. KEEP PERMIT CARD AND APPROVED PLANS AT JOB SITE INSPECTION TYPE DATE ACCEPTED COMMENTS YES NO . FOUNDATION: FOOTINGS ""..... WALLS FOUNDATION DRAINAGE " ELECTRICAL (LIGHT DEI'T) SEPARATE PERMIT: # ROUGH-IN I I PLUMBING UNDER FLOOR I SLAB '. ROUGH.IN WATER LINE . GAS LINE BACK FLOW / WATER . AIR SEAL WALLS ". I CEILING I I FRAMING ,- . JOISTS / qlRDERS SHEAR WALL , WALLS / ROOF / CEILING , DRYWALL . T-BAR INSULATION SLAB I WALL / FLOOR / CEILING I I MECHANICAL HEAT PUMP WOOD STOVE / PELLET I CIDMNEY HOOD / DUCTS PW UTILITIES I SITE WORK (Engineering Division) SEPARATE PERMIT I/'s: WATERLINE I METER . SEWER CONNECl10N SANITARY STORM PLANNING DEPT. SEPARATE PERMIT I/'s SEPA: P ARKING/LIGHTING ESA: LANDSCAPING SHORELINE: FINAL INSPECTIONS REQUIRED PRIOR TO OCCUPANCYIUSE RESIDENTIAL DATE YES NO COMMERCIAL DATE ACCEPTED '. . YES .' NO . 'f3.k.. J_ ./1 ELECTRICAL. LIGHT DEPT. 417-4735 ,I/r:.,O ELECTRICAL LIGHT DEPT CONSTRUCTION R. W. / PW/ , , CONstRUCTION - R.W. ENGINEERING 417-4807 PW / ENGINEERING FIRE 417-4653 FIRE DEPT. .. PLANNING DEPT. 417-4750 PLANNING DEPT. ....... BUILDING 417-4815 BUILDING T:\PLANNING\FORMS\II02.15 [412002] .. . . .CITY'OFPORT;t\ffGELES ........ ..,. '. DEPARTMENT OFCOMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT -BUlliDING DIVISION 321EAST5TIlSTREET.PO~TANGELES. WA 98362. Application Number . p~e~~y~.Mdre!3S ., ASSESSOR: PARCEL NUMBER: APplication description' . SUbdivision Name. Property Zoning .'. . APplication valuation Permit . . . . Additional desc Permit Fee .Iss1,le Date . '.. . , Exphation Date 94~80 6/11/03 12/08/03 Unit. Charge Per 94.8000 ECH EL.-RM-201.,400 1ST.' SRV<I!'EEDER ~ -~- -'--.':" ---"-,---,-.-- - - - --,--- - - - --- -,- - --- - - ~ - -,-, - -- - -'- --~ -~-_..;..:.. --- ~-- - - - - - -'- - - - -- e, . . .. . STATE SURCHARGE . 4.50. Charged Paid. credited ---_._----- Due Permit Fee Total Plan Check Total Other Fee Total Grand Total 94.80 ,00 4.50 99.30 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 . .00 , :" I t INSPECTION TYPE ACCEPTED YES J NO BUILDING 'PERMIT INSPECTION RECORD ;,\ : j~.~ ..q CALL 417-4815 FORBUILDlNGINSPECTIONS. PLEASE PROVIDEA'MINIMUM 24 HOUR NOTICE.. J1lIS'UNLAWFULrOCO '...... INSULATE OR. CONCEAL ANYWORK;BEFORE INSPECTED AND ACCEPTED. POST PERMIT IN A CONSPICUOUS LOCA TIONtL - _">.....'_'." "~,;~"'~--~' ,,- H' --,' ,,-,"-_~- ~ . . " -'" :;:.~::: '-,' , ' ,', - .' :' '. :'-.,' " > I, I KEEP PERMIT CARD AND APPROVED PLANSA 1I1OB SITE . , .DATE '.' .... . '..' ~H . .; . ,:'" .'. . " .... hC< ",,", . COMMENTs '.gl."", .:; . : .,:' .'; . ,:c;. :' I...J.V'. .. . FOUNDATION: ..' FOOTINGS. . '. . .. .' ." . WALLS.., " FOuNDATION DRAINAGE ELECTRICAL. '. (LIGHT DEn) ROUGH-IN'. PLUMBING UNDER FLOOR I SLAB ROUGH-IN; '. ;.. WATER LINE . . I . . I . . ..... .... . . .... ., . ",. .. ,'.. . ','" ,...... .: . ~'.~ . . -. . ,.... SEP.(RArt PERMIT: # ,';.. I . .C': <,. . . .' , . --:- '.,:~~ . . t ~ . . . . . :\ :. I . ... . '.;,,'1 \.' .' "'. " . . . . . GAS LINE -:- . . ..... ..' .... O' . 0 h.. :;" '~ "- BACK FLOW I WATER .' AIR SEAL ,;' . . ..' ,".' . . - ...,' \'. :".: " " '. " ;~ .i....'c. '-::.:, .{ n.: . . '-i '. WALLS CEILING FRAMING '. SHEAR WALL . ' WALLS I ROOF I CEILING . I>,J},~~"""pii.,~C' "" . T-BAR: . : . . I, JOISTS I GIRDERS I: ) p' . .... '. .' ,,';. '.~ ::r'" " . ';.' :,. . ". .. .. ,'. . . '., .... "INSUL~TION SLAB . .:. , . '. . I " ,. .. I .'. '. . .:~ . "':" I \, - '\ , , .. I'. " ; . . WALL I FLOOk I CEILING . I. ....'.... '. WATERLINE I METER SEWER CONNECTION . . '. ".:i..' .' P~:~:GDEPT., SEPARATEPERMIT#'s;.. ....' .' SEPA: Ot~'" 1f~";'o/eJ9A PARKINGILIGHTING: '.' ESA: ~~ . ~ LANDSCAPING, ..... """..:;;...0.... 1.,.,>d,.L~, '" .. ..., SHORELINE: i . .... 'Civ .... .... '.... . ". ..... .... ".;' ,'<"." lFINAt'INS}>ErtIQNS REQUlREI>,:P.!UORTOOCC-QJ!AI'i~fl!S~~"i.;,';:.h;i.,.. ' " RIl;~.lDtNTIAL'I"""h" 'c. DATEr',' ..' YES""li'" NO '; -COMMERCIAL .... DA.TE"<.' \'i'iAC;:C;:~UEI>< I ........; '. ....... ...... .' """,.'t;}.:,. '. .... ..}i"l{I,'.~ 10. YES ' NO ELECT~E~L-LlGHTDEPT. . ~1?~:35 t,tJ.;S3 klJ. 'i~t~~u:.~"j'i~;'."'""""" Iii CONSTRUCTlONR.W.I PWI / , ENGINEERING 417,4807 SANITARY FIRE ~ , ....., ..... 4p-465~ .. .,., -" .... CONSTRUCTION- R. W. , PW I ENGINEERING .' . FIRE DEPT. . i .. '. '. , , PLANNING P,l::PJ. i'C' ;. 'i. . -r...'."' i';' , BUILDING .......... \ ,01 ..... PLANNING DEPT. -BUILDING" . .,' 417-4750 .. 417=4815' ..'... T:\PLANNING\FORMS\1102.15 [412002] """,_r ~ S ~~ CITY OF PORT ANGELES DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT - BtJU.,DING DMSION 321 EAsT 5TH STREET, PORT A:NGELES, WA 98362 Application Number 03-00000100 Date 2/03/03 Property Address 1902 W 5TH ST ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER: 0630009002000000 Application description RES NEW SFR Property Zoning '.. . .. Application valuation 300000 Propet'ty owner LINDQUIST JACQUELINE M Owner address 182 ROSE LN PORT ANGELES WA 98362 ( ) Contractor . . . . . . . K 3 CONSTRUCTION ------ Structure Lnformation NEW 2363 SQ. FT. SFR Construction Type TYPE V NON-RATED Occupancy Type . . . .. SINGLE FAM & CONGREGATES Other stX'Uct info . . . .. NUMBER OF UNITS 1.00 Permit . . . . Additionaldesc Permit Fee Issue Date Expiration Date BUILDING PERMI:T -RESI:DENTIAL 2137.25 2/03/03 8/02/03 Plan Check Fee . Valuation 854.90 300000 Qty Unit Charge Per ~teDsion 1017.25 1120.00 BASE FEE 200.00 5.6000 THOU BL-l00,OOl-500K (5.60 PImK) Permit . . . . Additionaldesc Permit Fee Issue Date Expiration Date . MECHANICAL PERMIT 130.35 Plan Check Fee 2/03/03 Valuation 8/02/03 .00 o 7 ?\O>~ 'f./~ Qty Unit Charge Per Extension 47.00 14.70 58.00 10.65 1.00 8.00 1.00 BASE FEE ME- INSTALL 100- FAU ME-VENT FAN ME-NON-HAZ PIPE 1 TO 4 14.7000 ECH 7.2500 EcH 10.6500 ECH ----..----------------------------------~------~~------~-------.~------~----- Permit Additional desc Permit Fee Issue, Date . . Expira'tion Date PLUMBING PERMIT Plan Check Fee Valuation 125.00 2/03/03 8/02/03 .00 o Qty Unit Charge Per Extension 47.00 56.00 7;00 15.00 8.00 1.00 l.00 BASE FEE PL- EA.FIXTURE ON ONE TRAP PL- EA. INSTALL WATER PIPE PL- EA. BLDG SEWER 7.0000 ECH 7.0000 ECH 15.0000 ECH Other Fees STATE SURCHARGE 4.50 Fee summary Charged Paid credited' Due ----.-~---_._---- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- Permit Fee Total 2392.60 2392.60 .00 .00 Plan Check Total 854.90 854.90 .00 .'0'0 Other Fee Total 4.50 4.50 .00 .'0'0 Grand Total 3252.00 3252.00 .00 .'00 Separate Permits are required for electrical work, SEPA, Shoreline, ESA. utilities, private and public improvements. This permit becomes null and void if work or construction authorized is not commenced Within 180 days, if construction or work is suspended or abandoned for a period of 180 days after the work as commenced, orif required Inspections have not been requested within 180 days from the last inspection. I hereby certify that! have read and examined this application and know the same to be true and correct All provisions of laws and ordinances governing this type of work will be complied with whether specified herein or not. The granting of a permit does not presume to give authority to violate or cancel the provisions of any state or local law regulating construction or the performance of co truction. ~ '4-/03 Date Signature of Owner {ifowner is builder) T:\PLANNING\FORMS\1102.IS (412002) ~l --- ~ ~ ~ s ~ -t :s- ~ Date BUILDING PERMIT INSPECTION RECORD CALL 417-4815 FOR BUILDING INSPECTIONS. ,. PLEASE :PROVIDEAMINIMl1M 24.HOUR NOTICE. IT IS UNLAWFUL TocijVER, INSULATE OR CONCEAL ANY WORK BEFORE INSPECTED AND ACCEPTED. POST PERMIT IN A CONSPICUOUS LOCATION. KEEP PERMIT CARD AND APPROVED }>LANS AT JOB SITE ~, " INSPECTION TYPE DATE ACCEPTED '. " ':"., COMMENTS. .,., YES I NO .' ... FOUNi)1TION: ". :.. :n ....,. " FOOTINGS . .... ,. WALLS .' ':'. FOlJNDATION DRAINAGE .c', SEPARATE PERMIT: # .' . '" ELECTRICAL (LIGHT DEPl) ROUGH-IN I, ..' ,. .. PLUMBING UNDER FLOOR I SLAB , ROUGH-IN " WATERLINE '. GAS LINE BACKFLOW/WATER ... ././ ,. '". AIR SEAL . . .. ,. ,'. WALLS " CEILING FRAMING: t, . JOISTS r. GIRDERS \ . .' ". SHEAR'WtJ-L' WALLS/RooF I CEILING '.' " J. DRYW~L ~. ,. -'.' T-BAR , ,.,"','. . . INSULATION SLAB . I WALL IFLOOR I CEILING "Z." I .." ,,,,,.' . MECHANICAL . ."', '. . HEAT PUMP . . '. WOOD STOVE I PELLET I CHIMNEY '.' .' j HOOD I DUCTS ;: '.x'. :.:,,: ': . : +..,: .' , ',. .. PWUTILlTIESI SITE WORK (Engineering Division) :SE~ARATE PERMIT #'5: . . ,', WATERLINE I METER .. SEWER CONNECTION SANITARY . " .. , STORM '.< , ': ... PLANNING DEPT. SEPARATE PERMIT #'s SEPA: P ARKINGILIGHTING ESA: LANDSCAPING SHORELINE: f \~, "T '., . FINAL INSPECTIONSREQU:I~D PRI()R TO ~CU!,ANcYro,S:~h'" ..,.ii,' "'" ,.' RESIDENTIAL DATE . YES NO COMMERCIAL c:- DATE A<:c:EPTED .",( , " . h ,,' .','. , .. . .~....j ,,~('.. f'Ci " YES NO ';i.'!-'; ,. .. , ELECTRiCAL ~ ELECTRlCAl,c LIGHT DEPT. 417-4735 , LIGHTDEPT , .. ", CONsTRUCTION -R. Vi.: " , CONSTRUCTION R. W./ PWI ENGINEERING 417-4807 PW I ENGINEERING i FIRE 417-4653 '. . : FIRE DEPT. ; 4 i i " '. Om . PLANNINgD~pt. . ,. .. .. PLANNING DEPT. 417-4750 .. BUILDING 417-4815 BUILDING T:\PLANNING\FORMS\1102.1S [412002] --." ~ ~~ CITY OF PORT ANGELES DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT - BUILDING DNISION 321 EAST 5TH STREET. PORT ANGELES. WA 98362 Application Number . . . . . 03-00000100 Page 2 Date 2/03/03 Separate Permits are required for electrical work, SEPA. Shoreline, ESA, utilities, private and public improvements. This permit becomes null and void if work or construction authorized is not commenced within 180 days, if construction orwork is suspended or abandoned for a period of 180 days after the work as commenced, or if required inspections have not been requested within 180 days from the last inspection. I hereby certify that I have read and examined this application and know the same to be true and correct. All provisions of laws and ordinances governing this type of work will be complied with whether specified herein or not. The granting of a permit does not presume to give authority to violate or cancel the provisions of anY'state or local law regulating construction or the performance of construction. . Signature of Owner (if owner is builder) Date Signature of Contractor or Authorized Agent Date T:\PLANNING\F'ORMS\II 02.1 5 (412002) r---- BUILDING PERMIT INSPECTION RECORD O?~lrl) CALL 417-4815 FOR BUILDING INSPECTIONS. PLEASE PROVIDE A MINIMUM 24 HOUR NOTICE. IT IS UNLAWFUL TO COVER, INSULATE OR CONCEAL ANY WollK BEFORE INSPECTED AND ACCEPTED. POST PERMIT IN A CONSPICUOUS LOCATION. KEEP PERMIT CARD AND APPROVED PLANS AT JOB SITE- INSPECTION TYPE DATE I ACCEPTED COMMENTS I YES NO - FOUNDATION: - , FOOTINGS 7..-/9-0 ~ AJf/ WALLS ., --;; L: :U fJH J . I.. J!1 FOUNDATION DRAINAGE ' , fin !IliA ,<-3 ~o3 RJ ELECTRICAL (LIGHT DEPT) SEPARATE PERMIT: # -0- ----::;7 ROUGH-IN I PLUMBING K:--' 1l:;;; 1:- 31 -01 4P J~ UNDER FLOOR f SLAB P /ON) b "0 h i(- 1--- '~-~""'i M ROUGH-IN S"IU-n~ J I. WATER LINE ~-/~ - O~ J.l~ GAS LINE BACK FLOW f WATER , AIR SEAL T WALLS I - CEILING I 1'"2/ PJ/ D3, I \1 I FRAMING g.-/()--OJ-j 8 A__ ~~/I J.J.., JOISTS f GIRDERS &J9~f.) n1a'~~ ~nre-~ )1, SHEAR WALL rc;-CJ-n -:2.. ~\J WALLS / ROOF / CEILING 2./~1 n~ _ \t... L- ~p J DRYWALL , . T-BAR : INSULATION SLAB I i WALL f FLOOR / CEILING 1l7~?C?...l)~ J )J I I . MECHANICAL !Yk:.-L .-- Tnrl~ l"~W~ #p HEAT PUMP WOOD STOVE / PELLET I CIDMNEY HOOD / DUCTS , PW UTILITIES f SITE WORK (Engineering DiviSion) SEPARATE PERMIT #'5: WATERLINE I METER SEWER CONNECTION I/:.. //11 /1IJ"'2... ....\.L SANITARY , , .. , STORM PLANNING DEPT. SEPARATE PERMIT #'5 SEPAl P ARKINGfLlGHTING ESA: LANDSCAPING SHORELINE: FINAL INSPECTIONS REQUIRED PRIOR TO OCCUPANCYIVSE - : RESIDENTIAL DATE YES NO COMMERCIAL DATE ACCEPTED YES NO ELECTRICAL - LIGHT DEPT. 417.4735 ELECTRICAL LIGHT DEPT CONSTRUCT~N It. W./ PW/ CONSTRUCTION - R. W.: ENGINEERIN 417-4807 PW / ENGINEERING! FIRE 417-4653 FIRE DEPT. PLANNING DEPT. 417-4750 PLANNING DEPT. BUILDING 417-4815 In ~.. I J.,Lr BUILDING I&-W- 1 T.\PLANNING\FORMS\t 102.\5 (412002] BUILDING PERMIT - APPLICATION FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY: Date Rec.: -03 Permit #: 0 Date Approved: Date Issued: # . .,. ~~ The Building Permit Application must be filled out completely. Please type or print in ink. If you have any questions, please call 417-4815 Applicant or AgeI}t: ~ ~ V'V'y U N d < d e. (' +' cC...~ J~c.r"ef{J1,e L' d . Owner: ':"""J B.-v\C \ lL IN fu I <:;;.J Address: I q t),.. w s ~ >1. City: ~ A , Phone: CoQ, 3> 40 Sq Phone: S~ s- f?o {9 Zip: '" 5" J t ? Architect/Engineer: Phone: Contractor k ~ (I'Jrl~ -frur+IDI"? License #:k.a Con"~Pfr~xp: O)~(~3 Phone:&t3- 4057 Address: {J.O. 8~ 7'63) City:<~,,~~;:- < Zip: <t'l:J'i";J PROJECT ADDRESS:~~ LU~"5 _ S i-C'e..e.. T ZONING: LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot: I '"6- .Z- Block:_ 2- Subdivision: A.ldw.efl~ 5D af" S~b :3 ~ CLALLAM COUNTY PARCEL NuMBER:d?G ~o~1~redit Card Holder Name: Billing Address: City: Credit Card #: Exp. Date: VISA MC SIZEN ALUATION: '31 6 ?sF. @ $ /SF. =.$ SF. @ $ /SF. = $ .-' SF. @ $ /SF. = $' TOTAL VALUATION $ )/)O ~ / TYPE OF WORK: J1l Residential 0 New Constr. o Multi-family 0 Addition o Commercial 0 Remodel o Repair ORe-roof o Move o Demolition o Sign o Wood-stove o Garage~ o Deck o BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT: COMMERCIALIRESIDENTIAL: Occupancy Group: Occupant Load: Construction Type: No. of Stories: L Lot Size: l~HaV J1f % Lot Coverage: 0-0 l':;-? % . Existing Lot Coverage: 9'tJ('~ /sq. ft. + Proposed Lot Coverage: f:3 6~ /sq. ft. = TOTAL LOT COVERAGE:)! h 7 /sq. ft. PLANNING USE ONLY: APPROVALS: PLAN Notes: BLDG. DPW FIRE ESAlWetland(s):O Yes 0 No SEPA Checklist required? 0 Yes 0 No Other: OTHER BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION SUBMITTAL: Your application and site plan must befilled out completely to be accepted/or review. The Building Division can provide you with more detailed information on the application and plan submittal requirements. Your completed application, site plan (for additions) and building construction plans are to be submitted to the Building Division. VALUATION OF CONSTRUCTION: In all cases, a valuation amount must be entered by the applicant. This figure will be reviewed and may be revised by the Building Division to comply with current fee schedules. Contact the Permit Coordinator at 417 -4815 for assistance. PLAN CHECK FEE: Your plan check fee is due at the time the building permit application and construction plans are submitted. All other permit fees are due at the time of permit issuance. EXPIRATION OF PLAN REVIEW: If no permit is issued within 180 days of the date of application, this application will expire. The Building Official can extend the time for action by the applicant up to 180 days upon written request by the applicant (see Section 107.4 of the Uniform Building Code, current edition). No application can be extended more than once. I hereby certify that I have read and examined this application and know the same to be true and correct, and I am authorized to apply for this permit. I understand it is not the City's legal responsibility to determine what permits are required; it remains the applicant's responsibility to determine what permits are required and to Obtain~Ch. Applicant: . ~cl~J~rf-fDate: \ /,10 I () 3 T:\FO RMS\APPS\Buildingpermit .tf.! ~ B i I E iT , ( ,I , J 4-D J , SQ ~Th____ALLeJ-___ , / /0 ~ 5(/ -- v ~ w }.J / , +7 1'10' 0< DELvE,' W^y , 73 ,.. I 00 --[7}T~:E~. ALfl.EI\OY PROVIDE.D !i.D'1>RIVEWAY CU.R8 ~' _ ,L I l I I /1 I r D Ec. I~ ) _ _ "- '-:- - -' p-ert:.E I.HJ re 4-f S r-rooT ~qe. House 10 Loi /5 ~ Tn 15+0t:J~ ,;\.7 7u 5f)Jt+ J (Po' " 4'5' .1 I I f'lf5YfN6: . f '4" 28 I 'lEYI1S Imm ~ -t EXrST17:;{G- {jARAGE..__ aOJbffFT. --''I I I I I I' ~~=~ I , 1\' ,'" , '- - - -' -, I bEe. \<.. I ' if ;flfttf!lj!l~.~#JlliJ__ ~"S1{sy,' , , 10" Qo ~ " 56' / //0 If' " j , ;/' , 5- " '& 1"5 , /40 / , _~~-V\-~:~~,~T_ II . I Sc::,~~f--Yk ::-:::~trX____H' '. ......,,,:;:,.:,<:-:.':..:<i:,~";:. : ','. .".'".., ..",./ I ' i.. r /9e?2 0 ~ 4 ~ I J I I l :; 657536' ( ZONtNG LOT COVENANT ":::~wE l? obcr'ct~ I/WE ~~~,c>7 :;;0 r/;: ~ 4k,c'~ ,,# /J. d // /",./5- the undersigned owner(s) of the following described property: ~7.s I t2,.jJ 2 .&-/ d/<:c~ 2 ..c/ /J/.-/'~e..//..s ';;;;u L5d/ ~ /.$"-"41 c/ Sv 6C1 K,G if ~-' I- c" ,V {/ ILl r:.~ A2.. ::; S" o~ -;4<.- ~<'q /Cl ~c.T cf /../ S/;O€C.;- <7cf 'or AJt',vr L.c, d. l,u . I ~ ~u ?l.....,~ ~ b./' ~ r-';- /JN7...J -C s /J /.;'./;/ _ rt._ r ~ly. / '" '. , L{I#I'~~" ~'u" . "U,- .7Ti1....'. , do hereby covenant that said properey shal~ be designated as one zoning lot as defined in Section' III, City of Port Angeles Ordinance #1709 as amended. This covenant creates' one inseparable building lot. This. covenant may only be re!:!oved through compliance with Chapter 58.17 RCW, and/or the City Shore Subdivision Regulations, Ordinance #2222. This covenant shall be binding on the owners I (s ') heirs, assigns, and successors in interest and shall be filed with the AUditor's Office. This covenant is for the mutual benefit of said owner(s), heirs, assigns, and successors in interest and is for the further purpose of compliance with State and loeal land use and building regulations. This covenant may be enforced by injunction or other lawful procedure and covenant by the recovery otrany damages resulting from non-co:pliance. j I I f i -/c4 . Dated thiseii..l...:- day of ~~./ -~~- . ,1~ . ~~~' . . " ... -, 'wl'.J4C'J , - () ~'l .' "..: '.. "\I , C.l. t.) 'CT) , (OWner) (OWner) STATE OF WASHINGTON, g/ SEP 27 P:.! ?: ')h' (OWner) , . . v-:t .f.L ~ ~ p~i;( / t () t.iAR7HCRDYK. AUDii'Cii ClJ,~.JA COUNTY. ~':..SH. , AY~._._ ";....a 55: COONTY OF . " . ) ~ , Notary Public in and for . ~ereby certify that on this,~day 19 21-, ~rsonl!ll.l.y appeared before me '.:" .. /" " r . .. , , to me known to be the individual(s) described in and who executed .the within instrument apr!, acknowledged that ~ signed and sealed the same as -,Lj;., -' free and voluntary act-and deed, for the uses and purposes herein mentioned. f AND OFFICUL SEAL this ~ day ot , AOnf)-A Q/ ~~~ , HarAR PUBLIC in and or the 5tatD3-wa~.. gton'J residing at I Cf) . f D ~ , . t I F~led for.record at the request of this .~ day. of 19_ .Clallam County Auditor . PLAN. 203 /.' " t. '~.1 b -tIJ.. rL.u..- ~ c..u ()~. 9~~?J By Y III 933 ?~lll80 i t \ _ -------.J PREPARED 1/06/05, 16:17:58 CITY OF PORT ANGELES ADDRESS CONTRACTOR OWNER PARCEL . . APPL NUMBER: INSPECTION TICKET INSPECTOR JAMES L LIERLY PAGE DATE 1 12/30/04 1902 W 5TH ST K 3 CONSTRUCTION LINDQUIST JACQUELINE M 06-30-00-9-0-0200-0000- 03-00000100 RES NEW SFR SUBDIV: PHONE (360) 683-4059 PHONE : (360) 565-8019 PERMIT: BPR 00 BUILDING PERMIT - RESIDENTIAL REQUESTED INSP DESCRIPTION TYP/SQ COMPLETED RESULT RESULTS/COMMENTS 12/28/04 JLL 12/28/04 DA BL99 03 .1~/fO,t~I-, I JLL ---------~~--------- BL1 01 2/19/03 RV 2/19/03 AP DRW 01 2/25/03 TG 3/03/03 AP BI2 01 2/25/03 RV 2/26/03 AP BLHD 01 5/09/03 RV 5/09/03 AP BL9 01 5/09/03 RV 5/09/03 AP BAIR 01 12/08/03 JLL 12/09/03 AP BL3 01 12/08/03 JLL 12/09/03 AP BLI 01 12/23/03 JLL 12/23/03 AP BLWS 01 12/23/03 JLL 12/23/03 CA BL9 02 2/12/04 JLL 2/12/04 AP BLT 01 8/19/04 JLL 8/19/04 AP BL5 01 8/31/04 JLL 8/31/04 AP BL99 01 12/17/04 JLL 12/17/04 CA BL99 02 BUILDING FOUNDATION FOOTING BUILDING DRYWELL BUILDING FOUNDATION WALL TIME: 17:00 BUILDING FRAMING HOLD DOWNS TIME: 17:00 BUILDING SHEARWALL TIME: 17:00 BUILDING AIR SEAL BUILDING FRAMING BUILDING INSULATION 670-2028 BUILDING INSULATION WALL/FLOOR two inspections were entered on this date for the same item/j im BUILDING SHEARWALL JACKIE 565-8019 OR 670-6028 INTERIOR SHEAR WALLS BUILDING MASONRY WALL TIE Peter 808-0078 this inspection is for a rumford fire place and masonry chimney from foundation to roof.jll BUILDING FIREPLACE TIME: 17:00 Jackie 477-9590 BUILDING FINAL TIME: 17:00 JACKIE 565-8019 waiting for city attorney approval before completing final inspection/jll BUILDING FINAL JACKIE 565-8019 hand rails reqd front steps and rear off porch./jll BUILDING FINAL COMMENTS AND NOTES -------------------------------------- PREPARED 12/28/04, 13,18,24 CITY OF PORT ANGELES ADDRESS CONTRACTOR OWNER PARCEL . . APPL NUMBER, 1902 W 5TH ST K 3 CONSTRUCTION LINDQUIST JACQUELINE M 06-30-00-9-0-0200-0000- 03-00000100 RES NEW SFR INSPECTION TICKET INSPECTOR JAMES L LIERLY PERMIT: ME 00 MECHANICAL PERMIT REQUESTED INSP DESCRIPTION TYP/SQ COMPLETED RESULT RESULTS/COMMENTS ~~~~_::__~__~___~~~HANICAL FINAL SUBDIV, PHONE (360) 683-4059 PHONE , (360) 565-8019 TIME, 17,00 PAGE DATE 2 12/28/04 CONTINUED ONTO NEXT PAGE ----------------------------------- PREPARED 12/28/04. 13:18:24 CITY OF PORT ANGELES ADDRESS CONTRACTOR OWNER PARCEL . . APPL NUMBER: 1902 W 5TH ST K 3 CONSTRUCTION LINDQUIST JACQUELINE M 06-30-00-9-0-0200-0000- 03-00000100 RES NEW SFR INSPECTION TICKET INSPECTOR JAMES L LIERLY PERMIT: PL 00 PLUMBING PERMIT REQUESTED INSP DESCRIPTION TYP/SQ COMPLETED RESULT RESULTS/COMMENTS 5/14/03 JL 5/14/03 AP 6/13/03 JLL 6/18/03 AP 8/31/04 JLL 8/31/04 AP PL99 01 ~~ ~ -------------------------------------- PL2 01 PL6 01 PLSP 01 PLUMBING ROUGH-IN PLUMBING WATER SUPPLY PLUMBING SHOWER PAN Jackie Lindquist PLUMBING FINAL JACKIE 565-8019 SUBDIV: PHONE (360) 683-4059 PHONE: (360) 565-8019 TIME: 17:00 TIME: 17:00 TIME: 17:00 565-8019 TIME: 17: 00 PAGE DATE 3 12/28/04 COMMENTS AND NOTES -------------------------------------- PREPARED 12/17/04, 13:19:16 CITY OF PORT ANGELES ADDRESS CONTRACTOR OWNER PARCEL . . APPL NUMBER: INSPECTION TICKET INSPECTOR JAMES L LIERLY PAGE DATE 1 12/17/04 1902 W 5TH ST K 3 CONSTRUCTION LINDQUIST JACQUELINE M 06-30-00-9-0-0200-0000- 03-00000100 RES NEW SFR SUHDIV: PHONE (360) 683-4059 PHONE: (360) 565-8019 PERMIT: BPR 00 BUILDING PERMIT - RESIDENTIAL REQUESTED INSP DESCRIPTION TYP/SQ COMPLETED RESULT RESULTS/COMMENTS BL1 01 2/19/03 RV 2/19/03 AP DRW 01 2/25/03 TG 3/03/03 AP BI2 01 2/25/0.3 RV 2/26/03 AP BLHD 01 5/09/03 RV 5/09/03 AP BL9 01 5/09/03 RV 5/09/03 AP BAIR 01 12/08/03 JLL 12/09/03 AP BL3 01 12/08/03 JLL 12/09/03 AP BLI 01 12/23/03 JLL 12/23/03 AP BLWS 01 12/23/03 JLL 12/23/03 CA BL9 02 2/12/04 JLL 2/12/04 AP BLT 01 8/19/04 JLL 8/19/04 AP BUILDING FOUNDATION FOOTING BUILDING DRYWELL BUILDING FOUNDATION WALL TIME: 17:00 BUILDING FRAMING HOLD DOWNS TIME: 17:00 BUILDING SHEARWALL TIME: 17:00 BUILDING AIR SEAL BUILDING FRAMING BUILDING INSULATION 670-2028 BUILDING INSULATION WALL/FLOOR two inspections were entered on this date for the same item/jim BUILDING SHEARWALL JACKIE 565-8019 OR 670-6028 INTERIOR SHEAR WALLS BUILDING MASONRY WALL TIE Peter 808-0078 this inspection is for a rumford fire place and masonry chimney from foundation to roof.j11 BL5 01 8/31/04 JLL BUILDING FIREPLACE TIME: 17:00 8/31/04 AP Jackie 477-9590 ~:::_::__~__~~____:~~~::N:o::::::8:::M:~T:::::____________________________________ PREPARED 12/28/04, 13:18:24 CITY OF PORT ANGELES ADDRESS CONTRACTOR OWNER PARCEL . . APPL NUMBER: INSPECTION TICKET INSPECTOR JAMES L LIERLY PAGE DATE 1 12/28/04 1902 W 5TH ST K 3 CONSTRUCTION LINDQUIST JACQUELINE M 06-30-00-9-0-0200-0000- 03-00000100 RES NEW SFR SUBDIV: PHONE (360) 683-4059 PHONE: (360) 565-8019 PERMIT: BPR 00 BUILDING PERMIT - RESIDENTIAL REQUESTED INSP DESCRIPTION TYP/SQ COMPLETED RESULT RESULTS/COMMENTS BUILDING INSULATION 670-2028 BUILDING INSULATION WALL/FLOOR two inspections were entered on this date f6r the same item/jim BUILDING SHEAR WALL JACKIE 565-8019 OR 670-6028 INTERIOR SHEAR WALLS BUILDING MASONRY WALL TIE Peter 808-0078 this inspection is for a rumford fire place and masonry chimney from foundation to roof.jll BUILDING FIREPLACE TIME: 17:00 Jackie 477-9590 BUILDING FINAL TIME: 17:00 JACKIE 565-8019 waiting for city attorney approval before completing final inspection/jll BL99 02 f~t~' 7ZLLfIo. BUILDING FINAL ~ J;;}... JACKIE 565-8019 ----------------------------------- CONTINUED BL1 01 2/19/03 RV 2/19/03 AP DRW 01 2/25/03 TG 3/03/03 AP BI2 01 2/25/03 RV 2/26/03 AP BLHD 01 5/09/03 RV 5/09/03 AP BL9 01 5/09/03 RV 5/09/03 AP BAIR 01 12/08/03 JLL 12/09/03 AP. BL3 01 12/08/03 JLL' 12/09/03 AP BLI 01 12/23/03 JLL 12/23/03 AP BLW,S 01 12/23/03 ',JLL 12/23/03 CA BL9 02 2/12/04 JLL 2/12/04 AP BLT 01 8/19/04 JLL 8/19/04 AP BL5 01 8/31/04 JLL 8/31/04 AP BL99 01 12/17/04 JLL 12/17/04 CA BUILDING FOUNDATION FOOTING BUILDING DRYWELL BUILDING FOUNDATION WALL TIME: 17:00 BUILDING FRAMING HOLD DOWNS TIME: 17:00 BUILDING SHEARWALL TIME: 17:00 BUILDING AIR SEAL BUILDING FRAMING u~ 14.,(~ ONTO NEXT PAGn - - ~ - -- - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - -- t~ ~ ~~ f'AL u,()r., PREPARED 8/31/04, 13:30:33 CITY OF PORT ANGELES ADDRESS CONTRACTOR OWNER PARCEL . . APPL NUMBER: INSPECTION TICKET INSPECTOR JAMES L LIERLY PAGE DATE 1 8/31/04 1902 W 5TH ST K 3 CONSTRUCTION LINDQUIST JACQUELINE M 06-30-00-9-0-0200-0000- 03-00000100 RES NEW SFR SUBDIV: PHONE (360) 683-4059 PHONE : (360) 565-8019 PERMIT: BPR 00 BUILDING PERMIT - RESIDENTIAL REQUESTED INSP DESCRIPTION TYP/SQ COMPLETED RESULT RESULTS/COMMENTS BL1 01 2/19/03 RV 2/19/03 AP DRW 01 2/25/03 TG 3/03/03 AP BI2 01 2/25/03 RV 2/26/03 AP BLHD 01 5/09/03 RV 5/09/03 AP BL9 01 5/09/03 RV 5/09/03 AP BAIR 01 12/08/03 JLL 12/09/03 AP BL3 01 12/08/03 JLL 12/09/03 AP BLI 01 12/23/03 JLL 12/23/03 AP BLWS 01 12/23/03 JLL 12/23/03 CA BL9 02 2/12/04 JLL 2/12/04 AP BLT 01 8/19/04 JLL 8/19/04 AP BUILDING FOUNDATION FOOTING BUILDING DRYWELL BUILDING FOUNDATION WALL TIME: 17:00 BUILDING FRAMING HOLD DOWNS TIME: 17:00 BUILDING SHEARWALL TIME: 17:00 BUILDING AIR SEAL BUILDING FRAMING BUILDING INSULATION 670-2028 BUILDING INSULATION WALL/FLOOR two inspections were entered on this date for the same item/jim BUILDING SHEAR WALL JACKIE 565-8019 OR 670-6028 INTERIOR SHEAR WALLS BUILDING MASONRY WALL TIE Peter 808-0078 this inspection is for a rumford fire place and masonry chimney from foundation to roof.jll BL5 01 ~I~(f~r ~LL BUILDING FIREPLACE TIME: 17:00 ~ ~ Jackie 477-9590 ----------------------------------- CONTINUED ONTO NEXT PAGE ----------------------------------- l~Sf 1.Jt&S \ -CeM- ~ 1 e,^fl e~ 6J. bU t )/'lIDt( PREPARED 8/31/04, 13:30:33 CITY OF PORT ANGELES INSPECTION TICKET INSPECTOR JAMES L LIERLY PAGE DATE 2 8/31/04 ADDRESS CONTRACTOR OWNER PARCEL . . APPL NUMBER: 1902 W 5TH ST K 3 CONSTRUCTION LINDQUIST JACQUELINE M 06-30-00-9-0-0200-0000- 03-00000100 RES NEW SFR SUEDIV: PHONE (360) 683-4059 PHONE : (360) 565-8019 PERMIT: PL 00 PLUMBING PERMIT REQUESTED INSP DESCRIPTION TYP/SQ COMPLETED RESULT RESULTS/COMMENTS PL2 01 5/14/03 JL PLUMBING ROUGH-IN TIME: 17:00 5/14/03 AP PL6 01 6/13/03 JLL PLUMBING WATER SUPPLY TIME: 17:00 6/18/03 AP PLSP 01 ~~l/f~il ~(J PLUMBING SHOWER PAN TIME: 17:00 ~ ~ Jackie Lindquist 565-8019 -------------------------------------- COMMENTS AND NOTES -------------------------------------- PREPARED 8/19/04, 13:46:42 CITY OF PORT ANGELES ADDRESS CONTRACTOR OWNER PARCEL . . APPL NUMBER: INSPECTION TICKET INSPECTOR JAMES L LIERLY PAGE DATE 1 8/19/04 1902 W 5TH ST K 3 CONSTRUCTION LINDQUIST JACQUELINE M 06-30-00-9-0-0200-0000- 03-00000100 RES NEW SFR 01 2/19/03 2/19/03 2/25/03 3/03/03 2/25/03 2/26/03 5/09/03 5/09/03 5/09/03 5/09/03 12/08/03 12/09/03 12/08/03 12/09/03 12/23/03 12/23/03 12/23/03 12/23/03 SUEDIV: PHONE (360) 683-4059 PHONE : (360) 565-8019 PERMIT: BPR 00 BUILDING PERMIT - RESIDENTIAL REQUESTED INSP DESCRIPTION TYP/SQ COMPLETED RESULT RESULTS/COMMENTS BUILDING INSULATION 670-2028 BUILDING INSULATION WALL/FLOOR two inspections were entered on this date for the same item/jim 2/12/04 JLL BUILDING SHEARWALL 2/12/04 AP JACKIE 565-8019 OR 670-6028 INTERIOR SHEAR WALLS BLT 01 ~19 04 ~L BUILDING MASONRY WALL TIE Peter 808-0078 ------------ ----- ----- ------------- COMMENTS AND NOTES -------------------------------------- BL1 DRW BI2 BLHD 01 BL9 BAIR 01 BL3 BLI BLWS 01 BL9 ~) 01 01 01 01 01 02 RV AP TG AP RV AP RV AP RV AP JLL AP JLL AP JLL AP JLL CA BUILDING FOUNDATION FOOTING BUILDING DRYWELL BUILDING FOUNDATION WALL TIME: 17:00 BUILDING FRAMING HOLD DOWNS TIME: 17:00 BUILDING SHEARWALL TIME: 17:00 J BUILDING AIR SEAL BUILDING FRAMING PREPARED 2/12/04, 12:52:21 CITY OF PORT ANGELES ADDRESS CONTRACTOR OWNER PARCEL . . APPL NUMBER: INSPECTION TICKET INSPECTOR JAMES L LIERLY PAGE DATE. 1 2/12/04 1902 W 5TH ST K 3 CONSTRUCTION LINDQUIST JACQUELINE M 06-30-00-9-0-0200-0000- 03-00000100 RES NEW SFR 01 2/19/03 2/19/03 2/25/03 3/03/03 2/25/03 2/26/03 5/09/03 5/09/03 5/09/03 5/09/03 12/08/03 12/09/03 12/08/03 12/09/03 12/23/03 12/23/03 12/23/03 12/23/03 SUBDIV: PHONE (360) 683-4059 PHONE : (360) 565-8019 PERMIT, BPR 00 BUILDING PERMIT - RESIDENTIAL REQUESTED INSP DESCRIPTION TYP/SQ COMPLETED RESULT RESULTS/COMMENTS BL1 DRW BI2 BLHD 01 BL9 BAIR 01 BL3 BLI 01 01 01 01 01 RV AP TG AP RV AP RV AP RV AP JLL AP JLL AP JLL AP JLL CA BUILDING FOUNDATION FOOTING BUILDING DRYWELL BUILDING FOUNDATION WALL TIME: 17 :00 BUILDING FRAMING HOLD DOWNS TIME: 17: 00 BUILDING SHEARWALL TIME: 17:00 BUILDING AIR SEAL BUILDING FRAMING BUILDING INSULATION 670-2028 BUILDING INSULATION WALL/FLOOR two inspections were entered on this date for the same item/jim BL9 02 2/12/04 JLL BUILDING SHEARWALL __________~~~~_\~~_~___:~~~:~ :::~:::: ~6::~::2:-:~~~~:~~-:~~~-~~~~:---------------- BLWS 01 :r- ~-h;;iPll) fL W Q.-/t1 ~l~ ~ f1. r (2-t\S~. 0LL PREPARED 12/23/03, 12:35:05 CITY OF PORT ANGELES ADDRESS CONTRACTOR OWNER PARCEL . . APPL NUMBER: INSPECTION TICKET INSPECTOR JAMES L LIERLY PAGE DATE 1 12/23/03 1902 W 5TH ST K 3 CONSTRUCTION LINDQUIST JACQUELINE M 06-30-00-9-0-0200-0000- 03-000001~0 RES NEW SFR 01 2/19/03 2/19/03 2/25/03 3/03/03 2/25/03 2/26/03 5/09/03 5/09/03 5/09/03 5/09/03 12/08/03 12/09/03 12/08/03 12/09/03 12/23/03 SUEDIV: PHONE PHONE : (360) 683-4059 (360) 565-8019 PERMIT: BPR 00 BUILDING PERMIT - RESIDENTIAL REQUESTED INSP DESCRIPTION TYP/SQ COMPLETED RESULT RESULTS/COMMENTS RV AP TG AP RV AP RV AP RV AP JLL AP JLL AP ---------------------~~---------- CO"",NT' AND N"" ------------------------- ------------ BL1 DRW BI2 BLHD 01 BL9 BAIR 01 BL3 BLI BLWS 01 ". 01 01 01 01 01 12/23/03 BUILDING FOUNDATION FOOTING BUILDING DRYWELL BUILDING FOUNDATION WALL TIME: 17:00 BUILDING FRAMING HOLD DOWNS TIME: 17:00 BUILDING SHEARWALL TIME: 17: 00 ~ BUILDING AIR SEAL BUILDING FRAMING BUILDING INSULATION 670-2028 BUILDING INSULATION WALL/FLOOR PREPARED 12/08/03, 12,49,06 CITY OF PORT ANGELES INSPECTION TICKET INSPECTOR JAMES L LIERLY PAGE DATE 1 12/08/03 ADDRESS . , 1902 W 5TH ST CONTRACTOR , K 3 CONSTRUCTION OWNER . . , LINDQUIST JACQUELINE M PARCEL. . , 06-30-~- 200-0000- APPL NUMBER, 03-000 010 R S NEW SFR ------------------- ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- PERMIT: BPR 00 BUI PERMIT - RESIDENTIAL REQUESTED INSP DESCRIPTION COMPLETED RESULT RESULTS/COMMENTS SUBDIV, PHONE , (360) 683-4059 PHONE, (360) 565-8019 TYP/SQ BL1 01 2/19/03 2/19/03 DRW 01 2/25/03 3/03/03 BI2 01 2/25/03 2/26/03 BLHD 01 5/09/03 5/09/03 BL9 01 5/09/03 5/09/03 AP ";__O'___"IO.IO;__\Fl'~-----'U''"'N:,::::::' ~\(L s~t RV BUILDING FOUNDATION FOOTING AP TG BUILDING DRYWELL AP RV BUILDING FOUNDATION WALL TIME, 17,00 AP RV BUILDING FRAMING HOLD DOWNS TIME, 17,00 AP RV BUILDING SHEARWALL TIME, 17,00 -:~~~mm~-~nI91~lo~ ,,' CITY OF<PORT ANGELES DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS . . _. . . ~ . . . . . INSPECTION REPORT . . . . . . . . . . . REQUEST: Date J J -25-'-0"3. Time Received. by RI! (phone. person) .~ Location of Work to be inspected b q 02- W S 1- ~ Name of person requesting inspection Address of person requesting inspection Type of Inspection (circle appropriate one): Sewer Foundation .~0DChimney Plumbing Final 67D-(;,028 Phone No.S6S-~OJ9 Permit No. - 100 Sewer Excav. Other. JJ ,}/ S.e Q. L Time ,Q.M ~ By 21 L/ 00, RESTORATION REQUIRED . . . . .. YES NO ~ / () : '()()fj, VJl Me; lI\ '--- b€.c-, l 'S. l -~~IW~ ~t-J ~()~" ~b SURFACE RESTORATION: SURFACE TYPE: 0 Unimprov~d o Gravel o Asphalt OPCC o Other o Repaired by City o Repaired by Permittee o No Damage Found Work Order # o COMPLETE D INCOMPLETE (Continue ~n reverse side if necessary) STREET SUPERINTENDENT (DATE) ~, ~ '": ~~~ ~-')~~~ ..:~":;:~- '".,,'~~-'-:~~~ ,lG!l'1 ~ 'M"~ "~,;~~~"" ~ ;, ~ ~'~~ " G "" ,lj ~ ~ - ~ \'j, '" ~ i\l!il f- b" .. ~I! '!! : Bl:IILDING'"DIVISION $I' ~ ,. r,;" " ~~ CITY OF PORT ANGELES * * Correction Notice Job Located at ,,~ , !if' W ", /~ Inspection 0,1 your work revealed that the following is ,~ not in accord~nce with the codes governing the work in this jurisdiction: ' ~ f! I71'S These corrections must be made and are not to be covered until reinspection is' made.' .When corr ctions have been made, please call for inspection. Date ~ , lJ',c;n '!;i,! - . I . ~\f$1, '" ~ DO NOT REMOVE THIS TAG '" ~ Inspector for Building Divlslow If!, ~ '1.i'''' '~, III !ll '" ~,' ,~m' '" ~ __ _ ..:~': Ii ',' c.o '4.1: !iI DO NOT REMOVE THIS TAG 00 ." '!tl "" It ./ CITY OF PORT ANGELES DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS . . . . . . . . . . . INSPECTION REPORT. . . . . . . . . . . REQUEST: ~ Date :=> -q-c>'""<; Time , Received bY~-e....-'- ~personl Location of Work to be inspected l qo. ~ oJ S t-It. ~ N t I t1 d! () I ~f Name of person requesting inspection K - ?> /I YY1 Address of person requesting inspection Phone No. 1/ IJO -@OO{!)' Type of Inspection (circle appropriate one): Permit No. J t<rf'") Sewer Foundatio Framin Chimney Plumbing Final Sewer Excav. Other hen.-' tel clolP T7 INSPECTION NOTES: Catl b.e-k>rL i J15P-eQ/-toY7 -9r f;w, e.. Inspected: Date S-.a.? 63 Time By R L/ Remarks: J 0/<( RESTORATION REQUIRED . . . . .. YES NO SURFACE RESTORATION: SURFACE TYPE: 0 Unimproved o Gravel 0 Asphalt 0 PCC D Other o Repaired by City o Repaired by Permittee o No Damage Found Work Order # o COMPLETE o INCOMPLETE (Continue on reverse side if necessary) STREET SUPERINTENDENT (DATE) CITY OF PORT ANGELES DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS . . . . . . . . . . . INSPECTION REPORT . . . . . . . . . . . REQUEST: Datelo-I~-03 /' Time Received by R V (phone, person) INSPECTION NO!~~r_ /) Inspected: Date ~ Remarks: ler02 W S i-~ Phone No. Permit No. IbO Sewer Excav. Other By J7 -/' Q\L/ RESTORATION REQUIRED . . . . .. YES NO SURFACE RESTORATION: SURFACE TYPE: 0 Unimproved o Gravel o Asphalt OPCC o Other o Repaired by City o Repaired by Permittee o No Damage Found Work Order # o COMPLETE o INCOMPLETE iIilinue on reverse side if necessary) STREET SUPERINTENDENT (DATE) CITY OF PORT ANGELES DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS \ . . . . . . . . . . . INSPECTION REPORT . . . . . . . . . . . REQUEST: Date {o-I,- 03 L-/ Time Received by 'Rv (phone, person) Location of Work to be inspected Name of person requesting inspection 'Address of person requesting inspection Type of Inspection (circle appropriate one): ~~oundation Framing Chimney INSPECTION NOTE~ Inspected: Date ~ . D 2- Remarks: /9 tJ z u-J S't-l-t ~(~"t.L"l~ +- Phone No. Permit No. Plumbing Final Sewer Excav. Other IDe Time ~ .---. By -1 L Vk- RESTORATION REQUIRED . . . . .. YES NO SURFACE RESTORATION: SURFACE TYPE: D Unimproved DGravel D Asphalt 0 PCC o Other o Repaired by City o Repaired by Permittee D No Damage Found Work Order # o COMPLETE o INCOMPLETE ~ C (Continue on reverse side if necessary) STREET SUPERINTENDENT (DATE) CITY OF PORT ANGELES ,,/ DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS . . . . . . . . . . . INSPECTION REPORT . . . . . . . . . . . REQUEST: Date t!JS-}Jj.lo.., Time I: IS- A'JJ1~Received by erson) Location of Work to be inspected Name of person requesting inspection Address of person requesting inspection Type of Inspection (circle appropriate one): Sewer Foundation Framing Chimney Plumbing L:~lin"~ Sf-} tfS?-/~'Io Phone No.I-j~/ -{>{)Of Permit No. I GX0 Final Sewer Excav. Other INSPECTION NOTESPd Inspected: . Date . ~ Ic,t t)~ Remarks: Time :> ',"flf" BvJk D\<- RESTORATION REQUIRED. . . . . . . YES NO SURFACE RESTORATION: SURFACE TYPE: 0 Unimproved 0 Gravel 0 Asphalt 0 PCC o Other o Repaired by City o Repaired by Permittee o No Damage Found Work Order # o COMPLETE o INCOMPLETE (Continue on reverse side if necessary) STREET SUPERINTENDENT (DATE) CITY OF PORT ANGELES DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS . . . . . . . . . . . INSPECTION REPORT . . . . . . . . . . . REQUEST:/ / Date lJ 7' 0/ fl, Time f ~ ~ tJ.I1'J <Received by ~(PhOn~~ Location of Work to be ~ns~ected. . I eb 9-: ~ftt sf-: Name of person requesting Inspection __Al::!J.~ Address of person requesting inspection I q 0 [)- (.ft' .E;fh Phone No. ~,( (9"t'7 / Type of ircle appropriate one): Permit No. / fJ-O Se er Foundation Framing Chimney Plumbing Final Sewer Excav. Other F12 k~/..d....~Y NOTES: / .,,- Inspected: Date 2-/9-c.? Time r~JM By Remarks: ()k v R1/ RESTORATION REQUIRED . . . . .. YES NO SURFACE RESTORATION: SURFACE TYPE: 0 Unimproved 0 Gravel 0 Asphalt 0 PCC o Other D Repaired by City o Repaired by Permittee o No Damage Found Work Order # o COMPLETE o INCOMPLETE (Continue on reverse side if necessary) STREET SUPERINTENDEI\.IT (DATE) ,----- CITY OF PORT ANGELES DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS . . . . . . . . . . . INSPECTION REPORT . . . . . . . . . . . REQUEST: Date 2-25-63 /./ Time Received by I2LJ (phone, person) Location of Work to be inspected /q 0 G Name of person requesting inspection ~~ -c;. Address of person requesting inspection Type of Inspection (circle appropriate one): sewe~~raming Chimney Plumbing wsi-'-'\. Phone No. . 8:8--0e'j l Permit No. I DO Final Sewer Excav. Other INSPECTION NOTES: . Inspected : Date (.. .- 2" - 03 Remarks: Time By-RV tfR. " RESTORATION REQUIRED. . . . . . YES NO IDtDO 14M weds 0 SURFACE RESTORATION: SURFACE TYPE: 0 Unimproved 0 Gravel 0 Asphalt 0 PCC o Other o Repaired by City o Repaired by Permittee o No Damage Found Work Order # o COMPLETE D INCOMPLETE (Contif'lue on reverse side if necessary) STREET SUPERINTENDENT (DATE) CITY OF PORT ANGELES ~( DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS .~~ h v ti. q' j . . . . . . . . . . . INSPECTION REPORT . . . . . . . . . . . REQVEST:~~~~~ Date ~--8-tl~ ,-/ Time ~ Received by J C I I /B~~ (phone, person) Location of Work to be inspected Name of person requesting inspection Address of person requesting inspection Type of Inspection (circle appropriate one): , ,Lj n'~J I~L Phone No. ~~J.. . Permit No. __ '" .L Final Sewer Excav. Other ~-/ 00 Sewer Foundation Framing Chimney Plumbing IN::~TES:. / T-~ Z!lsfi.v1 Inspected: Date B /3/03 Time /~ Remarks: BY-=f~ RESTORATION REQUIRED . . . . .. YES NO SURFACE RESTORATION: SURFACE TYPE: 0 Unimproved o Gravel o Asphalt OPCC o Other o Repaired by City o Repaired by Permittee o No Damage Found Work Order # o COMPLETE o INCOMPLETE (Continue on reverse side if necessary) STREET SUPERINTENDENT (DATE) October 10, 2003 JACQUELINE M LINDQUIST 1902 W 5th ST. . PORT ANGELES WA. 98363 Re: Height Limitation of new construction(1902 W 5th S1.) Dear Property Owner: A recent site inspection of your building site indicated that your new residential structure exceeds the city's maximum building height by approximately 2.5' feet. The City of Port Angeles Municipal code limits the height of a structure to 30' - 0" on an average grade. The City of Port Angeles Engineering Department was contacted by the Department of Community Development (Building Division) to measure the height of the structure with technical instruments and found that a section approximately 12' - 0" in length is 32.59' in height, based on an average slope of the grade. No further inspections will be made on this structure until this issue is addressed. Please contact me at your earliest convenience to discuss this matter. Sincerely yours, Jim Lierly Building Inspector 360-417-4816 October 20,2003 [ffi [E~[E~W[E~ ~~~~ CITY OF PORT ANGELES Dept. Of2~~!~~!~Igeve!opment 519 South Peabody Street, Suite 22 Port Angeles,Washington 98362 (360) 417-0501 Fax (360) 417-0514 E-mail: zenovic@olympus.net INCORPORATED Mr. Brad Collins, Director City of Port Angeles Department of Community Development 321 East Fifth Street Port Angeles, WA 98362 SUBJECT: Lindquist Residence at 1902 West 5th Street, Port Angeles Dear Brad: At the request of Jacqui Lindquist, a site inspection of the residence was performed to determine the height of the structure relative to a benchmark, established by Lou Haehnlan of the City of Port Angeles, as the average height of the lot. Based on this benchmark, the maximum height to the twelve foot section of ridge in question was determined to be 29'-9" +/-. The benchmark established by Lou consisted of some flagging placed on the ground approximately 3' south of the existing curb cut, which now serves the new garage. This flagged benchmark was located very near a crack in the curb. The flagging is no longer present and the grade appears to be worn down at the location due to construction traffic. Lou showed me the benchmark when I accompanied him during a foundation inspection. He did this in case of any questions arose in the future since I was to serve as the interim building inspector after he left the City of Port Angeles. For some background information concerning the building height shown on the plans the issue was brought up during the permit process. The maximum allowable height of the residence was discussed with Lou since the plans actually showed a building height of 32'-6". I believe Lou documented the maximum allowable height of 30' prior to issuance of the permit. The benchmark was established by Lou at the beginning of construction at the request of the contractor, K3 Construction, and the owner so that the 30' height restriction would not be exceeded. With this benchmark established the building could be modified during construction to not exceed the allowable height. During construction the height of the second story was reduced by one foot and the roof pitch adjusted to not exceed this maximum height based on the benchmark established. It should be noted that the finish grade of the site has yet to be determined with at least 6" to 12" of material to be placed on the existing grade. Due to the fact that Lou Haehnlan of the City of Port Angeles established a benchmark, it seems very unfair that the City is now questioning the height of the structure. All efforts were made to comply with the height requirement including lowering the second floor wall height and adjusting the roof pitch based on the benchmark. Based on the benchmark established by the City of Port Angeles representative, the height of the building does not exceed the allowable 30' maximum. fc: IN 02247 ~ ,~ ... SCOTT T. COLLINS 1901 W 5th St. Port Angeles VV A 98363 (360)452-9458 lPfi Ie (G Ie ~"~ r DEC. 1 8 2003J CITY OF PORT ANGELES Dept. of Con~~~~ Development December 17, 2003 City meeting 9:00 am Lindquist I stand by everything said in my November 14 letter to City building, Dept. will City, stand by everything said ?? After first on site measurement, something else Jim said was also picked up, when stated by me, Collins, that the witches hat was over height limit Jims response was, "rio it's not, only the very top of house is over a couple of feet. II There needs to be a complete investigation into this whole matter I am even willing to pay for the Inspectors polygraph test. I do not like being lied to by people who's table I put food..... Why was I told the house is indeed over 32' Will Inspector Jim deny under oath he told me that ??? Why is the City telling people there were 3 measures when there were in fact only 2... Are they counting the first as the one Jim told me early on, lIit's been measured already back in March." My response, March?? How March,' construction hadn't even started In March !!! How could it have been measured ???? This whole thing is starting to reek, just like the 1990 border dispute between Wooldridge v Layman v Collins. .. Once the City realize that Collins had possession of his own property up to his mapped, recorded, survey line and that this was going to be a matter of adverse possession by Wooldridge on the west side of vacant lot at 1905 W 5th, and that this was between Wooldridge and Layman Construction, their stories change then too, making up numbers... lying to a judge..... To cover their ass, the City let there be a house built on a 37' wide lot, violating that building code also... [no structure on a lot narrower than 50' wide].. I purchased a tape recording of the hearing, but gee, like magic somehow someone forgot to record the part of the hearing when an attorney and qthers spoke against the allowance of building on a 37' lot........ Or it was erased.... ," #" Now the City of Port Angeles could be guilty of falsifying and tampering with evidence so a newly constructed house will fall within the height limit. I repeat, I want answers, I never did recelve the coples Brad Collins said he would mail.. I want three of the city officials under oath and made to answer my questions ln November 14 letter, and four addition questions that will nail this case shut"" if they are not afraid of perjury, they will do so........ City officials of all show know there are reasons for rules, I had to file anti-harassment against first owners of house next to me. It was a one way order against Mr. Kuehn and wife. Also I had to file against Layman construction while in process of building the house on a 371 lot... Think about that, guy on East has 601 legally, rightfully. Party on West has two 501 lots and 131 of lot 19 due to adverse possession. You donlt think allowing a house to be build on a 371 lot would not create problems. And now the City allowed a house to be built 31 over the legal limit! My 0 My !! /~--ft-~ Scott T. Collins QUOTE.DATE J J-IJ-o 2 .V'1:Yt:~ U^ I t: ,",ve un I tIN. i z.1r- /.A) /}-L) 2x '-I ;r: C- t LFT. RT. TAIL QTY. SIZE PITCH D.H. D.H. CUT P t / .1- '8" -7"6 1\ II C~_~. .. /t J 32- IL #-1 ;I.. jJl- f Z-x-~ .f), C--, )(P I~ {>L ~~~~;::~r~ I 2- 1\ I' IJ J 32- /1- 11- Z- Jlo Jb h ~ :.I- n II I /1 I 3~ }v H-3 110 Ih fit L. 1\ ,\ I I I fJ .} 3::2.. J7...- rI-Lj I~ Ih iL' .2- 1\ II () , It J~ 5 3;t JL 5]7) fA. ~'- ." , . f .1- 1?11'1~S 1\ P /,L8 J'1 (z. i fh fJ t.- I/L{)-fitv - (p' " I~ fL '1.- hI/nit $ q : I , ~ '7 1'1 IL Sro J?l.; _~" " ft- .. -- , . . __ .. oM _ ' '-. , -ry H .C- In j- 1-1) IV -' Ih p 6 JIWJM Ib Jh rL J J1- 1 ; ,. , . ' .' I - .. - ,it , - ,- ~ 'J./ -' VI ;OS -/0 ~ I I "'- .. F J 10 17- tI-1 / It. t Z-..:<. (", /J.e, 0 0 fL f./{}ft.'. PITt-if Cj.J f1-;JtI n. $ I I " .:L f5!NIJ Wll.f ~-r I?-I ~ l-l r Yl. of (i-. I 23'-'2 I?- H~I Z pet' ~t:.. /5y (, /b /h 1\. t. ' 2;3~ )1, If fl- , ... J .. G- I JZ- I If. 7- w/'-/ ~'fi Lrn- Jh )b lv' 1: ,. ....../~! e' ~ , I " ~ I1J/Z 'CA7vJ fi/ftlf-'f"- "I ,. '[ I .2-3--~ J'L 57Z) TIL It, /b Ie. 1-1 t.f I I .. i I'.. /6 ~ fJ'-' 23-~ J1- .f TO T1J-, It If" q "', "- I I -" - 5 7?;) J7l w J z ~~-,- /l.,/ t 1://...... /b 16 r,-- ,:2.:> . 1.- }L J 5, I II, 5l.- w/y ~o/I :" /b ~ 23-'i: J?- 5 TV fll- A / J..tf7"" /6 /l- JOB No. ~- 9 I 7 I PH. 2X 'J- ~ ~ v. BLOCKS L.//I/ D6{VI5T 2X i-( 1&,1-/ S. BLOCKS , BUILDER /(-3 DEL. CHARGE ADDRESS SUB TOTAL - - - , HOTE: - Job mUOLt bo Gccosslbl.. for our trucks. Any !lx'ra tlmo or charges Incurred wIll bo added - to th!l bIll. -"._~ _..~ QUOT E Q....}E . QKVtrl: U^ I C ...v~ "'''' I ~ I.-}z, <f/- Ln f.r.!) LFT. RT. TAIL QTY. SIZE PITCH "2... '-1 T, c." O.H. D.H. CUT PRICE :X_ C] STYvtJ 7P' C/H'>~ 12 \ ILI6-U7 fin ' "- \ -- N I 2--q 11.- G r /l.. IArH-T jh t'-' r- .0' :570 T7l~ CA-I P " .~- -. J ~ I '- ;{' rYl I 2-~ } 1-- SP "j7l.... C'A--J P l./ fl./ ltf'l lb fL I .:1- I J& k. ~ I L I z.q }& s 70 J?v CA-J,o 2 (J..l(~ Jb fl- I ~ ''\ ., k l.. z,q J'- $,-:0 71L I~ 110 PL " .J- ~1 ., I k- z.. 20) li- S -m Jf\.., lip 0 fL ~ ..1- f\. ., V J-Lf) ')...~ ,7- 2.. P L-Y '7..." ~.f, Jb 0 ~ IJ J- t'5j6 ~r J.h;<l 1 .--- I ' I . J..I-J / fJ L Y 2-)'. (0. 13; (, t) J' lr fL- ./ ~-rt 12.., _ .. , ..... .. .- . .- .. I .J.'f !l ., ,.H y\ .. -> 2- .Il.} -5 'L. 11- .$ra 7'?V C- l- P ';..~r;L.-~ Q It:, !t- - . . .- f -- J II :. ~ '" 'I .~ /-L-f.) I /10 Pc 14 -51: 14 t.lh-v ~h &.tl () . .. - I II -- ~ ~I J\ P '-/ 1l.J -sf 7t ~~.~ /b /b f'L (j , " :i: :S~"l3 rrJ 6.-19"J ~ .. II f' J 1'1 -sf. IL .5 ?17S/J1\.." /10 Ib h. I '" "" (9 j.tLJ /1 3ft -z Pt.-y "Zx.. h 5.(, 0 0 - . - - - - JOB No. I PH. 2X V. BLOCKS - 2X S. BLOCKS I - BUILDER 1(-3 DEL.CHARG SUB TOTAL! - ADDRESS . - - - -- - NOTE: - Job must 1.0 Dcc...slbl.. for our trucks. Any - odra tlmo Or charges Incurred will be oddod - to tho bill. - . J -- --....- -------- QUOTE DATE UKUt:.K U^ I t: UUt:. U^ I t: if Z -# C4/!-o T,C, LFT. RT. TAIL , 'QTY. SIZE PITCH 2.:;.<. !( O.H. O.H. CUT PRICE I .J- 2.'11' h~/r:J3 ! / . .f - :L. 8 /1,- c....o M IUL s ff-r:::. 10 f ..1- <t'r!() //2>I-( ;%5 t( ~ ~E.j ~ /7- I , , I /) If:, 8J/!J't/z .IV j/J; , I I 2- ,7 'J I.J If/I., e,.,.t: It - IlLS g It.- US/!, 32 ^- !:C 7- '- l~ g'~ /' ~ j-5ll"V Fi1 t--L- ff1 jJ K-I/ ----- .2- 7' ,/, fa' ftJ::> #l - ! I / I ? II-- Cof<-lVu ~!i..7 /0 .:L SlolL ..J 1-~ , 2.'1.{' L' h3 - 3 2 13/. IL- b" -- (LIP . . .' ~ / ,., 71 Z''f~,' ffl It:, - .3 IL , . r i-- '..1- 7 ' 5,k .s I!r-t.t /!7- - ~ 1-1'1 I z... F I/{ '- l., #-1 >0.' /<-.// .. - - - .- - - - 1- 211f'b~ o "oJ! q1'I f: ,A-(..E 1~ I / -J~~...s ~ :l. 12- C-oMIfA- 5M3 Ib r ~'.1- '$/6 ~ /-1'1 11..- ? . F (.-1 I..t- If-; P iLl""!"" , .\ :L 2/~ /b 1/ z.. I ..L 11.- - Z -IO'L U MV f{...If- $Ib;:$ It_ .:1. '1 ' fY'S 1- .. - zi-<r , Iv t/'~ Ib 2 -/0 2- '" 7~/oi .. , '.2 / -/0 Iz.,. $/,6 FVtt..-L- !-/-7P IGtr "--"" Lft$T?i - OrJ 70 !l- /2.- JOB No. I PH. 2X V. BLOCKS 2X S. BLOCKS , K-3 DEL. CHARGE SUI LDER SUB TOTAL ADDRESS -- - - HOTE: Job must b.. occD.slbl.. for Our truck... Any - extro time Or chorlle. Incurred wIll be odded to th.. bill. --~- rqUOTE DATE . tj }J:F lo /1-'0 -r- (1 lFT . RT. TAIL . QTY. SIZE PITCH ;<X t( f 1 '--., O.H. O.H. CUT PRICE I 3- '2-: 1-/',Io'tfJ 1\ / & /"2- Co R--rJ ~ $ {1~ Ib - 3- b', (Jrr> '" I SltJlt V A-vrc, S " -- 2- o l3e, /v r9~ , 3- b' ,,' (?I IO'~ ,'-- - ~&r g IL- "i' 1 1 It, . / I () I .frT>_ ~ / " , )t - .J.. l- 'Jt /..... ;J3'z. I 1. 8 /6 6 P WI /t1... !-I-JyJ jL,} f ./ t 3- 14 /10 - 7 '0 p...... mu -rJ IrS , ~ I. C ,;;:,A r TO 1/' /Z--, t:>6--If:.- I( "3 ~ 0 - JL- IV\".,..... .- 1- - ,~ c/u K-, T ...-" ~ 1- 111 Iv SJ/i..411t- fh.jJ . . . . - L ~ .:L Z:l(~ 1'\ ,: It, - I /t- G() R-rJ 1C../l.- S fbr I '3- " e,ltJo;. It:. - jE:r b IZ- k' ~ I "'.:l . '^ - IJLJ Jl.; U?/& fJ/~d /1., -r:C W MI- u.d: /b 7\. . ~ I /' ~ I- '..J ~ /-/1(-52- ~~ ..5 fJ ;'?r Itt- /f7!' !<-IT &9 tA 1.. 'i ~41J~ d--.. ~~ HA-rJ6-N\...S /0 iju > ?.10 H ftrJ ~r..(t.s ).. I.H-J uS lb- ~ H fttJ6v~~ JOB No. I PH. 2X V. BLOCKS 2X S. BLOCKS K-] DEL. CHARGE BUILDER SUB TOTAL ADDRESS . - -. -. . - HOTE: - Job mu:at b.. occoll.lbl" fo, ou, trucks. Any ext,o tlm.. Or Charlie,. Incurred wIll bo added - to the bill, .- Vl'\Vt:~ UI\' E: VVE: vn. C Q a ?- q I ?-- 00) ~-Y'... Jt7/; 0 (05 <T '-t. '1 "'- -1f1^ B~ ~ I o(,,~ . ~ 0( P&d_7f)r'<(~....~.~ "3 ~ ( f~ s - YfrB) [E ~ [E ~ 'W [E ro' f~ ~ \!Va q <;{3C:2. lnll.IUdJ - (J . OCT 3 0 2003 . o ~~ '?11,A.. ~1A3 CITY OF PORT ANGELES . J J. '. . I' Dcpl. of Community Development . -r~ ~ ~ ~ ~~.:TlL--~ 0-/ ~e-v~ .4". -LA..e-a ~ ~/~ ~ ~ Iq~?-.. W~ S -ph ~. ~~ ~ W"a. q~"3 ~ J ~ ~ ~~, r; ~-ck~~~~~ i:p ~, JZ ~ ftJt.d -bIt.1L. ~ ~ '3~ p. df ~ a<J ~ ~ t4 0 ~ ~--&h.~ ~ 30 r' )... ~~ -6 -t;k ~ ,,; ~~/k3/:;J~~ ~~~ ~/p~~~~, We. ~ /tLd ~ t~ ~;;6 ~J:'___ -tk-~ ~ '." ~~'d J?-~ ~ ~cr/~~~/'P~ ~r~~~~. ??/~~ · CL ~ ~ -bL- t~ -r~ .~.i;;~~~~ ~" ~~~~,~ 1f/~/ -r~1~ o-J ~ ~m.."~ ,k;~. rlu:, ~ ~~?~ a.-.J ct ~ ~ aftlt.... ol~ ~ ~ uPf (I cr(;}..j .'. ., ,-"1< .. ad d-.Cf ^ 003 I 1!J1,A. B.r-~ ~/ D;'~ ~1pcrVt-~Dr-d~~ D~ I telA/? S -t! w. - f rJ .1.'.1.".12~...... fE((~~[E~1 Wi [E ~-- :3 -;J. 11 r 'I '?-.~".,_~.o<_ !ldJ f o-vt T' \!Va q '?] 6 ;).. (LOCT2 9 20031 .. . i ,.C1TYOF PORT ANGELES D m _ /P /./ . :.~_'~',,1.n: Community Development . ~ ".... ~, ..-."'.-.~--,-- '(kh ~ .~ -G ~.~.~ ~cL ~ ;6 -'l,A..RACt-;;6/uz.. -' . ~ ~ ez-;t,- () I "l CJ d-.. vi/' ~ S' ?f P. ~ c:r-.;:i- 1'V' a q ~ 3 6 3 ~l~ ~ ~, ~#tLC~J~~eA~ ~~ '-t a4/ .J- ~ ~ tk- ~.e.. ~ "3? fI C ~ CUJ dr..a,aA"'- Cl~~ ~ ~r! ~ (~-tk- ~ -bt; 30 r' ~. ~ j;/~ ~ ~t..e. ~~~ ~ ~ f)~/ k3'h~.J~ ~ ~ ~JvJ~/fad~ ~~, I W~~~~~~~~ ~~~ cg-fl~~~t; ~ J?- ~ ~d~it0-~~/~ ~/.J~ ~~~ra. t;rt.J ~ of 3 r;. 111 ,h ~~ . a f~ ~ -t:k- M 'r'~ . ~-~~1;/vL~~ ~. cL~~~/r~d p.~~J !~~ ~7!1/).~ ~ ~. ~ .(U-<-rVt: ~ /Wl-;yvI>-e-J ~ ~ ~a-~~c1~~~~ I - I" .- .. ' L~ ~~ (qo?. W Sit.. fT. C?.e1~) 6--vl 111 A~. -r hL to-i cd ~ ~ ~ , . ~ I '? ~ ~ ,;,...... Tb ~ ~~ -#..e- ~ ~A.~ & -:J-9j-wt/..n-~ '3~ C ~ ~rf~ ' , J r;t:' I~, ~ ~ ~ ;::z::; , ~ ChtIL ~ ,cvr ~ 'JIlh ~ /JT ~~<Vl~~ ~'L~ ~~~9'~~~ ~ d..-~(d ~ Ire- ~9r!q~, --r ~ -u..- ~Vv<- l4- ~ d.-e- "30 fd ~0; ~G1; iiF~~. ~~1t! /~ " Larry A Undsderfer P.O. Box 3835 Sequim, WA 98382 (360) 683-4059 Lie # K3CON**222M1 Fax: 1-360-683-1778 E-mail:larrv@k3eonstruetion.eom www.k3eonstruetion.eom I(,J lTiIlCi ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~N~~NNN~~ City of Port Angeles Dept of Community Development 321 East Fifth Street P.O. Box 1150 Port Angeles, WA 98362-0217 Oct 23, 2003 Dear Sir or Madam, lmlE~[E~W[E~ ~CT ~8 20031 CITY OF PORT ANGELES Dapt. of f'f'r"''''':')~ij,;,lh, nt)q~loprrp~rr:' This is in reference to the new home of Ms. Jackie Lindquist located at the corner of 5~ and M Street in Port Angeles. It has come to my attention that there is a question about the height of this home. Before pouring the foundation of this home, I called the Port Angeles City Building Department to establish from what point on the ground I was to start in order to comply with the 30 ft height restriction. The City Building Department sent Lou Haehnlen to meet with me around the first week in February 2003. At that on-site meeting with Mr. Haehnlen was the home owner Jackie Lindquist, Ron Miles of Miles Construction, my superintendent, Mr. John Hughes, and me. Mr. Haehnlen set the starting point of the height from the curb and Mr. Hughes set the stake at Mr. Haehnlen's direction behind the curb and painted the curb with orange paint. The paint has long since disappeared, but the stake is in-tact. The stake is located at the curb side just left of the driveway approach where the curb starts and makes the bend to the driveway approach. Ms. Lindquist, Mr. Miles, Mr. Hughes and I were all witness to Mr. Haehnlen's decision of where the stake should go and where the 30ft height count should start. If there are any questions please meet with Jackie Lindquist at the site and she will point out the stake from which you may take your own height measurements. BJt Regards, 0VVd Al ~ Larry ,A. Undsderfer ~N~N~NN~N~~~~NN~~N~NN~~NN~~~~N~~NNN~N~~~N~NNN~NNN~~N~~~~~NNNNN~N~~N~~ 8~~ f~.~ ~ rf'~ ") ':L I faA/f J~ s;t. f04~ wa "l',?,.(O<. CITy -52i103 U . D.PI, "g[ PORT 0_ --d """'f ANGEL I V'-', -tb ~ ~ r( N ~ :;l.. t-{ ~?--(lO.3 . 'YD'""P!.~' o ~ 111r-.. ~.' ,^--. ' Uu-~. ~. ( -,t-. . .. . d lu- ~ ~ l<! -tL.--/ ~ .ft-,J ;:ik ~ ~ (q 0 ~ ~ -(1J1.. 5'-t, (j'~~. wt1- qfi 76 ~ ;a ~ ~ ~ vv-- ~ .;d. ~ ~:s yo t! ~. '^- ~;tie .- M WdI ~ ~ fJ r: '/ 7-c?o'/ ;:.J tk 1"~I~~~~~~~ ;:;}d ~ -tk ~~ ~~.a; ~, cf.--- ~ ~ -tJL;, 7,;' ~ ~ ~ a;t u ~.J.-~ ~ ;4, ~~ o ~cr(~ ~ .L(r ~.~~/~~~~ .s f.,S ~ 'l, 0 I q &"- ~ 7 0 - c, o;:L '6, ~J , ~ ~1~ J ~~~ w:ftc:J ~~~2! o~ ~ ~ 1'15"/0::> November 17,2003 J aque1ine Lindquist 1902 W 5th Sreet. Port Angeles W A. 98363 Dear Ms. Lindquist The Department of Community Development (Building Division) received calls about the building height of the new single family residential located at 1902 W 5th Sreet. The Engineering Department was contacted to verify the height of the building and measured the building on the average slope of the grade. The measurement of the structure at construction grade is 30.19' in height, which is less than 2" over the limit at construction grade. Although the plans submitted for approval where shown at 33'-0" in height, the builder and the engineer who are hired by the owner, removed 18" out of the original foundation, 12" from the second Floor, and 24" from the trusses that were ordered making the structure before construction 29'-6". The Building Department has determined that this will not be in violation upon completion, as the finish grade will bring this measurement in compliance during final grading. Sincerely, Jim Lierly Building Inspector 360-417-4816 Xc :~~~ ~-4 I -- . T'\ r'\ n".., A ~ T ~ T: L 1'":' (" IJvK1.f\:'Iun n~ -CITY OF WAS H I N G TON, U. S. A. DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT November 24, 2003 Jaqueline Lindquist 182 Rose Lane Port Angeles, W A 98362 Re: Building height and average ground elevation of new construction at 1902 W. 5th Street Dear Ms. Lindquist: I am following up on the November 17,2003, letter that you received from City Building Inspector Jim Lierly and our discussion last week on-site about the height of your new residence and the average ground elevation of your lot at 1902 W. 5th Street. The City did come to the conclusion that the structure has been built to a height of 30.19 feet above the ground floor level and above the mark established by former City Building Official Lou Haehnlen as the preconstruction average ground elevat~on on the subject site. The current average ground elevation of the site was measured by City Public Works Engineering staff as 2.37 feet below the finished ground floor level of the residence and Mr. Haehnlen's mark. Therefore, for the building height to meet the Zoning Code height limitation of 30 feet, the finish grade of the site at the perimeter walls of house must be brought up on average 2.56 feet (.19 feet + 2.37 feet). We will provide final framing inspection after modification, if any is needed, to the foundation and/or wood siding that will allow for the necessary backfilling to accomplish the established finish grade for the house. 1 appreciate your cooperation with my staff in establishing the average ground elevation set by Mr. Haehnlen to avoid the question of the planned finish grade. If you have any questions, please contact either Mr. Li~rly or me. Sincerely, ~CkQ < "? . BrG Collins, Community Development Director cc: Jim Lierly, Building Inspector 321 EAST FIFTH STREET · PO BOX 1150 · PORT ANGELES, WA 98362-3206 PHONE: 360-417-4750 · FAX: 360-417-4711 · TTY: 360-417-4645 E-MAIL: PLANNING@CI.PORT-ANGELES.WA.USORPERMITS@CI.PORT-ANGELES.WA.US REDI-LETTER@ e:L A'~ 01;, SIGNED: ~FORM@ 4S468j4P468 POLYPAK (50 SETS) 0 NO REPLY NECESSARY CARBONLESS SPEED/SET tf.r1- 756-:$ J I ~ SCOTTT. COLliNS 1901 V.J 5th St. Port Angeles WA 98363 (360)452-9458 IR1 [Erc;[E~W[E ~ DEe 2 4 2003 CITY OF PORT ANGELES Dept. of Community Development -.--.....-=.-.,,, December 23, 2003 City Building/ Lindquist After having to pick up the documents from City Hall on Dec. 18, 1 see now that there have indeed been 3 measurements ordered by the City. However/ due to the fact that all 3, ordered by the City/ are different, we are still requiring clarification. We still be- lieve there needs to be an independent/ of all parties/ measure of the Lindquist house. There have been 4 measures/ 2 above 32.5' and 2 at 30'. However, the not so independent, hurried, measure by Zenovic was done by Gudgel with a tape measure running up and down the inside of the house, and then "adding and subtracting" a foot or so on the out- side. 1 want all questions answers in previous letters and the follow- ing. Keeping in mind that any omissions or errors is grounds for an injunction without it being considered frivolous. 1 want all reason why "benchmark" was placed by curb in Feb. 2003 on City Right Of Way at the 1/3 mark of property from alley?? Can City Right Of Way be part of average grade ?? Where was 2nd "benchmark" when City measured 32.5', and how does that change the height of house 77 Why was benchmark not placed at 70'/ between road and alley?? Why on the 9-17-03 measure, the average is 104.87 and on the 10-31-03 measure, the average changes to 107.27 ?? Are the any laws/codes that state, the first, original Feb 03 "benchmark" overrides all others. When 1 add on in a few years, can [1J then place "benchmark" on highest 1/3 of prop. at curb on City Right Of Way, which is approx 3' higher than average grade, bringing-allowing my house to be even higher 7? Please answer [all] questions this time, 0lm did not want to answer any questions on Dee 19th and referred me to City Attorney Craig Knutson. A reasonable man, but out of loop until this goes to legal. I will appreciate a prompt and clear written response. I ~~ Scott T. Collins ~ 120RTANGEtES WAS H I N G TON, U. S. A. DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT December 22, 2003 Mr. Scott Collins 1905 W. 5th Street Port Angeles, W A 98363. Re: Difference in Interpretations of the Height of the House at 1902 S. 5th Street Dear Mr. Collins: In response to your request, this letter tries to explain the difference in the City's interpretations of the' height of the' house under construction at ,1902 W. 5th street. . , ' ' 'On October 10, 2003, Building Inspector Jim Lierly's letter to Ms. LindqUist stated that . the height of her house was 32.59 feet above the average grade; which exceeded the 30 foot height limit in the Zoning Code. This measurement was based the average ground elevation at . the perimeter walls of the house and of the site, too, as surveyed by the City Engineering Department. In response to thatJetter, Ms. Lindquist and her representatives identified an average . . grade elevation mark set by the, City Building Official Lou Haehnlen before the building site was . excav~ted. Based.on that mark, the City Engineering Department remeasured the bUilding height , and determined that th~ house would be 30.19 feet above Lou's mark on the site as well as the ., finished ground floor level of the house; This information was communicated to Ms. Lindquist, inaNovember 17, 2003, letter from Mr. Lierly. Im-ote a second letter to Ms. Lindquist dateH . November 24, 2003, clarifying that the finish grade of the site at the perimeter walls of the house must be broughtup on average 2.56 feet, making the building height at 30.0 feet above'the [mal ,grade around the perimeter walls., , , What confused everyone was the need to replace all the dirt that was excavated around 'the house. This backfill is necessary to reach the 30 footbuilding height approved in the . bUilding perrriit plans. The City uses the final ,grade in measuring building height, arid how much' . . replacement of excavated soils was to be donew-as not obvious on October 10,2003. Also at the. of the October 10,2003, letter, staffwas not aware of the average grade elevation mark set Mr. Haehnlen, since he had left the City's employ in March, 2003. 1 hope this explains the discrepancy in the City's statements about the building height that concerned you greatly. The City has worked hard to address this concern, which others in neighborhood also have. .lfyou have other'questions, please feel free to bring them to our', Sincerely;' I -~--J./,?j)' , " " . I ~ Brad Collins, Community Deyelopment Direc~or EAST FIFTH STREET · PO BOX 1 150 · PORT ANGELES, WA 98362-3206 PHONE: 360-417-4750. FAX: 360-417-4711 "'TTY: 360-417-4645 PLANNING@CI.PORT-ANGELES.WA.US OR ,PERMITS@CI.PORT-ANGELES.WA.US , MEMO DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Brad Collins Director 417-4751 Sue Roberds Assistant Planner 417-4750 Scott Johns Associate Planner 417-4752 Roger Vess Pennit Technician 417-4712 Jim Lierly Building Inspector 417-4816 nOR" T"" AN 1."G' · E'''' 'LE" S' i:::::'.rt{~:'Lj D~K WAS H I N G TON, U. S. A. November 7, 2003 TO: Jaqueline Lindquist FROM: Jim Lierly (Building Inspector) RE: 1902 W 5th st. Building Height. The Department of Community Development (Building Division), Received information about the building height concerns ofthe new single family residential located at 1902 W 5th 8t. The Engineering Department was contacted to verify the height of the building and measured the building on the average slope ofthe grade. The measurement of the structure at construction grade is 30.19' in height, This is less than 2" over the limitat construction grade. Also the plans submitted for approval where shown at 33'-0" in height. The Builder and the Engineer that are hired by the owner, removed 18" out of the original foundation, 12" was removed from the second Floor then the trusses that were ordered had 24" removed from the original design making the structure before construction 29'-6". The Building Department has determined that this will not be in violation upon completion, as the finish grade will bring this measurement in compliance during final grading. Jim Lierly Building Inspector 360-417-4816 I Craig L.Miller Jane Catltor Shefler Christopher p" Shea ,; 1\1iller & Sh.etler, P.S. A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CORPORATION ATIORNEYS AT LAW August 27, 2004 ~,y .i(@Ie'~::!~~i~ AUG:27201l'f HAND DELIVERED Brad Collins PORT ANGELES PLANNING DEPARTMENT P. O. Box 1150 Port Angeles, W A 98362 CITY OFPORTANGELES Dept. of Community Dev~loi>ment RE: LINDQUISTPROPE~T\'~T1902Wr:~tl"IFp-I STREET REQUEST FOR REV1r:W OFDlRECTO:R? S INTERPRETATION Dear Brad: On behalf of my client, Jacq~tj)B~ggq~ist,andB~~gant to PAMC17.96;080, lam appealing for a further interpr~~f,I-!~2~lby the,'~<;>fH".q!of"Adjustment, ".yollf de,dsion<a~ pianning Director in regard to th~:c~~~~tioI1of "h~ight'\as it is currently being applied to the Lindquist residence at the aboyeaddress. Factually, there is a bit ofa taIlgl~q)!~~il pnded~iB-g)this.Teqt1est. My client first had ~ benchmark of the" average heig~t:.tqt her l()t '. ~~!fl15li$hed 'by Lou Haenhlan, thethe.n'" ?uj1ging inspector for the CitY':IJ;:~~~< b~n~l11TI~k'Xa~:established bflsed on th~ ~Ee~ ~()I1structionheight of the 10t.D~i,~~/g~I1stl}!~t!pI1}.!h~IJroperty was excavflted'aIl?'!~~ b~~Jqing's height was adjusted SP)~~'~P!yto exceed JhirtY Keetabove the prY7det~9.11}tieg" " benchmark. The ,specific languagec{of'the zoning ordinance height definition is ,:as' foll()-ws, PAMC 17.08.045(B.): "Height-total distance i~ f:yt lrolll \ayer~~y; g~ound elevation ~t perimeter walls to top,<qf si~p.cor<structur~,ex.~ept the television, antennae, roof-mounteq '<'P3Y9hanical equipment, and other appurtenances are exempt from height requirements." The City isnow interpreting th::'l1.~~~~!~ij)'B.~lclllatio~t~;gy.[OlIl the, excavated l~vel,not tl1..ygenchmark determined' usingi!~~tPf~~gBB-structiof1:gr~?~;<0Vith thatinterery!flt!pn, ,the' building is almost 32 feet "high?"/;'~~;.)!~..~8~evyr'P3~rTl~'.ll inch. or so higher than thirty feet "high" when using the original grade of the property: There are two issues to be considerediniegardto the Lindquist residence: ;. ., .- 711 East Front Street,~u!te~>., Port Angeles, WA 98362 (36'0) 457-3319 ( (3(jP)457-3379 Fax e-mail:attorneys@millershefler.com i;';i;'.iit. I, ~ " Brad Collins PORT ANGELES PLANNING DEPARTMENT August 27, 2004 Page 2 1. The City, throughiit,sya~~Ilt Mr. Haenhlen, established a benchmark to determine the height of the hous~.,I~i~;~greJhan inequitable for the City; atthistime, to reverse that decision, and to therebYc~~seiny client thousands of dollars of costs for correction of the City's error. 2. The city' s interpre~at,io,~~]';i~,ir~g~d. to the Lindquist residence, is that the height must be measured from<the'RF,g~~li ~levation at, ~he ", perimeter walls, of the residence as built. In the instance oftl1~;;~iIl~qI!istproperty,anexcava!ion -yvasfirst l1).ade on the property, and the residence?~!!fi#;t~~t~~~av(ltion: The interpretation relieclupgn results in a reduction. in the hei~~tJlX~I~?l~ fOLPse ?nthe; prop~rty from. what w?uld otherwise be permitted, particul~lr1~if excC\vati9I1 ~ere minimized to allow maximum height use. Thus, if Ms. Lindqyis! hadnotex:s~vatec.l her property to facilitate construction, she could exceed .!B~;i;~~ig~t '. whi9h ,s!!~is preseI1tl~ being told is the maximum allowable. The curreQr,!g~~p?r~tation" in the specific factual situation which exists, is punitive to Ms. Lindqy~~!;i;~v~~?sen method, of construction, as opposedto what is otherwise allowed under the zomng,ordinance. For these reasons, it is regue~~~~;;<,!~~t this matter be reviewed by the Board of Adjustment, to determine whether the director's decision is correct inthis case. Very truly yours, MILLER & SHEA, P.S. -;;;? CLM/llw cc: Jacqui Lindquist " \ \ \ _:__,~__r"""" ~~ I';:;~' :\ .._.................. ..................c.... ......... . ,", "';j?i';"" ,~, \ . (J.i ._~C<=~ ,. .\\-;o~--\ .-/-\l-~:\--;,;;< . .~-~.-_..._-_... .".--' e. ..._............. ..._......_... ." ..' .....,...... .c.... .-.....,.. ." -' ,.., .- ....... .............. ~. '- t ..1" . \ .:nC=- -~/j\-/~'\ - ../- ---':t- J./ ." \:,0~~j!;\ , GJ>. . : -- .... /0:1 \ '''''''.\' ..,,~...''''#,--=,.;.~.....,;.-t... ..' , ' , ". ' ...- . -'-",'" ' __" /r;- _\ _,. .,":- ..-'-'. \-.. '-c-' -..-----.-: .?Y ,j ,,(;j) I""~ -=:_:~:::::~:~~$-!--' ----.....----.--..."...-- :.'.;~~"" (! 8 ....--..,..-...----.--....... .__._131..~... ;11 :107- '. ...~~;;:.;"';;;...,,;.... . :3.o..~." :5 0- ~Tl ,'1 \D1' . ') 1'~ I ~O2.. w.5- 0\ \0(.,' ~ -:= /0 t./. g 7 111 e..a. n. 1 rea k I 3 7. t/- , - "lo4,S 7 3:2. S 7 Cupola.. I '3.s-. '1/ _ //14.17 3 (). Sf G.. ~ 0 f+' Wa (ra. tt, 't-/7-o3 / '2--1 \Db' ,... U' ~ I . e:> \ Dc... .00 j:;} , "~+- ,--", vvc:jCi &V /3. iA~_,/,-'C '-1 () \./ "/ /v eJ / /" ,<j ~ // (..-'C;;C/Y " . -- ,~"" ~ "TGH t ffh / c2- ~:;!? --03 ---- f' J-(;i C) '-. ) ''25-1 p r (,'1 / ' r1 ,! '--r-' n. /1 J) IlIclf;z,JiS / /vW~ tJ<€' . I "'1 r., . <' I \ /, /.' C,.. -.. '//.)/f' L,,/hJ I ,/ _ t>.z'p:F II .J r ~ g. '0 ~ .;l t' BUILD.ING DIVISION CITY OF PORT ANGELES * * Correction Notice w c~~ Job Located at 1 t} D ~ Inspection of your work revealed that the following is not in accordance with the codes governing the work in this jurisdiction: H ^,I-l"~ ~iJIMV f!'<H/....- &;. /'iiCi ~) ~\ ~ \- ., ,J J-uvt..t:rlt 2u J FJ ~. '* f~ . ',\4/1 fJ1~vtlrutflJ.J--J. DuJ~ 5~~ ~ e) o~t.4-. eY \)0 llo ~ ~~v r:;1-e LhtJ-:) ;Ct<L...-t ~ n(LIJ ~ Jf These corrections must be made and are not to be covered until reinspection is made. When corrections have been made, please call - L q; for inspection. Date Jti.I, los I DO NOT REMOVE THIS TAG " " CITY OF PORT ANGELES DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS \ v) . . . . . . . INSPECTION REPORT. . . . . . ~. .U>~ REQUEST: Date Time Received by (phone, person) Location of Work to be inspected Name of person requesting inspection Address of person requesting inspection Type of Inspection (circle appropriate one): Sewer Foundation Framing Chimney Plumbing 1l10L U.JCS1h ..-.-: . 1f\...Vvu..(J...J ~ Phone No. Permit No. Final Sewer Excav. Other o1~2f INSPECTION NOTES: Inspected: Date (p LI O~ Time Remarks: L-o c.~ \yL.n.k.J WA-LI 1<' ~O -Su of W'/{~~ ~ L~~IC~ ! tKr irfE'Y /N7?5N1? J'/J gun!? t//~g/, RESTORATION REQUIRED . . . . .. YES NO ~"''-''''I-Ef LlfoolOQlJl'>< - (,7o-f.poze / II~/ ~l ":'\..: V) I\.. /' 0L-o(,,$. \A}~V .. J ~~ 1 ttf 17 ;' IlJ '- / , S T!1 S.{. SURFACE RESTORATION: SURFACE TYPE: 0 Unimproved 0 Gravel 0 Asphalt 0 PCC o Other o Repaired by City [] Repaired by Permittee [] No Damage Found Work Order # o COMPLETE o INCOMPLETE (Continue on reverse side if necessary) STREET SUPERINTENDENT (DATE) M i~ ..J T .R E E T ( ( ~ E~-rW fJ Soun, ~ 00' ---+-- ~~ l:J) 'F- f-' , +7 ;ALflEAOY ?RoVIDE:D //),D'bRIVf.WAY CURB I i i / }- -+Ai I' , ~ Qo j DRIVE ! WAY GARA GE. &5~~f ! t _.~ , ;4D I I I } ! 73' I I I I /1 I f DEc.I" " '- - -" ) - - per-c.EJ.JT;)ge H 51 FooTi/q", House 10 LOT 15 ~ fD 15focdIr.-:. ;),77" .5PJ.+ ,.,.. 4'5' I ALLe)' ( / /0 50' I I It' I I " EXI5T1N& ,-- 28'4 ----f 6 , 5". EX/STING IfJRlVfWA,Y zf J GARAGE 80iO ~ FT " '6 "5 I I II =f=B=i ---{. _ II 1\" ~- I O'Ec. ,,- - -: (R6POSSD -#01.1 3'5M sy I i -- , , "II QD / -- , (PO ------.-f / /0/ .L__ 56' . ---- - --/ S\\, n~\=.~T S(Attcj!z."-" J 0 I " I I /40 I I 1 ,1 -'7'- 39\7d ~, 3Wn,OA i ; : ~ S) ($~~~~ ~ i ~ ~ _'#'~~"'-::;_'~ ~~~m~ ,;:Ulfn ~ ~ - .. '~f' . lJ) m~ . . , , :<'~"1l~~ ~Cj~ ~ ; ~ ~ ?~: - ::~ , ~ - ~,;-~;'.,> ~2i ~ t t " ~ ~drn~~ '" ~\~~~ ~ ,-, t I U. ~ ill ! ! ~~-4~~ " ~~r ~ O~~~~~ m I III -(j) ill , III ',<~ 11 0 Z-CS~\) ~8b' '- m Mi\l'~ m Ql GH 211 m m c:1fl111 i D~t 8 ~~~ ~I iD 1Il ~~~~~ ~(jj~2NI~ c -l J> ~~~~~~ Q ~ ] ~U) ~ Nr -l N "N ,\i'I ~ ~:SJ ,I'ti -" ~ (jOUi~ lJ) ~ 12 ::iffiiiJ ~lln ~ ~ t - f113!J'2h ~ Z b1ffib ~ III fl1 , ~lJ)~l\) z ~ Ul ~1l1r--~ 01 (j)fl1C> C . --i 'I \lJ III "'} ~b<f' < 'f'r , m h (f). [\] ~~~~ -< ~ n"~ '~ f ~ r'6' , ~ 0 tJ 3~ffiro 1 !~~~nt ffi iD'( I 2r-UJb . ! ~~~~~~~ zuV1r-- -4-4 tJ , --(~M i~@ ~~~~~~ btJ[jjJ iG z ~. iii jl 0 , :i ~ Lrn ! z 2' [\)~,rn1\J iii q i ~ j, :D~~6~ 'I!:l 5 [ {::II: Z(f)02 i ll~ ~ -jfl1i\j~ ffi -'~~ei'l !,' Z i\J ; ;: i fiiUia . iJ) Ij , z " EVANS 5T12EET ~~~I~ -=-- --Nms',.-. I !~ ' I r---- l ~II i;, ,rol ". I ~ i~ ,i 5! ~-------!,.jl' !'I 11 10 II . Ill! 01 ~ i "N33"/5'43'e /39.88,) :.l '1-4 ~, '. lC "T I : I '1' i t Z iJ) u' Z ~ [\.l ~ ::.. ~ '-I ,-1m ' ~ ~'I N,:;:. '. ~ & I rn I :O\J\ro' ,- ~()'.,fl1 I]~ ' ~ ()lid -4 -I, {11 . ~ : i~1 I '" ----, '\ ' i 'N;;-/5'%-E /39~;7-' __ I, ___'_'0'__ ~___ ~~ ,;,,-:;:;--. __~ ~~33'1'5.4U-e - M STeEET ~ ~ o ~ .' c.;' ~. ~. ll: \ \~J P~i~~~ ~~~I " " l/l -1l)Q it. ~ ~ ~ cl>~&~~ . . . ~:r~R~ ~' - ~ ;~~ ~~l ~~m"~~ ~$~~ ~G ml11 1.I1l>1l1< r'O~ ' ~~. " ~'~8,~ 5 ~h il. o 1< -Oi] rllk roh ffi::WAJ~ill 2--1 -1 ~~CJ~~ ~ b, 0 ~~ 'lloo. m~~i oo~ .~ ~ill-l@~ ~ 11 0 1il(J 111~~ q~dH ~ ~~!t~ '52 Ii' ~OCR d- , ' 0 it ~'1 J ~ ~ ~ a~~~ ~~~Z~~ ~~~~,~~rz ~ :t> iri ~"- ~51~ ~~~~~ ~rIi"1~'i~ S .'{ ~ {/ D 8gio~ O~!_ . "\ \) i 5 ~ ~ I ~ 5, ~ it' :0 < s ~ T1 . , ~ ::! '~ ',~ I~ ~ ow 2 !J ~ ~ ~ g , { { ~ ~ Property Details * * See county assesor for official records * ,. county assesor data dated December 2003 Parcel Parcel number: 0630009002000000 Taxcode: 10 Address: 1902 W FIFTH ST Unit: Vol Pg: v818 pg327 Parcel description: ALDWELLS SUBDIV OF SUB LOT 35 L TS 1&2 & VAC ST ABUTTING BL2 SURVEY V17 P66 (35A) Parcel Comments: 89CX#123 , 03CX#192 2003DP#1 , OwnershiD Title Owner: LINDQUIST JACQUELINE M Contract Owner: TitJeowner Address 1902 W 5TH ST PORT ANGELES ,WA '98363 Taxpayer: LINDQUIST JACQUELINE M Taxpayer Address: 1902 W 5TH ST Thilber land: $000 PORT ANGELES WA 98363 Acreaae Improved: 0 Unimproved: 0 Timber: 0 Total: 000 Assesed Value Improved land: $56,180.00 $0.00 Unimproved Land: Improvement: $8,849 00 Total: $65,03000 TO SEARCH: 1. Press 2. Select information 3. Right Click mouse and select "apply filter sort". . Close ~ Property Details * ';;'cSee countY assesor for official records * * ~ollnty asse:sor data.dated December 2003 'c-cc~_~~___~.-"'-'..:_'::.C"":':'.':'''.::' ,_~,~__'.'_'~"_"'__'_ _~""~':~"""'_'_=~__":::""""-_". "'".~..~~__.._~__"_~____._...... Parcel :0" " Parcel number: Taxcode:Address: Unit: Vol Pg -: 106300090016500~0 ro-----1 :1901:'" FIFTH ST -i r---: r~7-i4P9307, Parcel description: IALDWELLS SUBOW OF sUB LOT 3sLOT-20- BLl & 10' VAC- M ST-ABTG ( 19:11)- -~ -- ----1 L ____~ __~ - I Parc~I:Comm~-nt5: OwnershiD '_.",<H, '__ ':i:;m-fitle diiJ'ner: Address Taxpayer: iJ l"lOOo o '" 0 ... 2::1.I><?;- u,u.t.>Ut .... .... ;l;)1~1 (,,(,,"'0 C) ... 01 ... o <.uu, I>> Ut IJI I' I' :>0 ~t o Olll /II ~;-1 .. C\ C\ 01 Ijr! U> ~~.: I 01 j; ~ I t.." fU 0 HdO .. .. 91 91 LI 91 tl ~I ~I II ~~ ~ ":/" OO~ ''tlJ.SNO:J 'J.S '119 !;~'6f - gS-vf "'1.1> Cll + iAu. I>> I' :'1t ot /IIu, a:'l ~~ g~ :/'7 DO!; ''tJJ.SNO::J :J.G 'II!i !i!i-6l: - Si'S + "E ~ 9 L 9 t 8 6 -II ^" ^M " ~ .. " "d/~:~;: . 017" ,>,} . ." -' 7hi.e' z.,..,- ~ '. , ? (",fl .'1 ~d 11 ' :1 :1: , .., "I&d ~ Q( 11 . : -~ - " ~.~': , '>~-":'c~'.~;:_;,:p:?L;7;~~:;:~if,~~'- .;~~~ ;:-- ~;:t~ -i..~:~d,~_-_ ->:~~':,:_ = ~~t4o:D ., :7 ". ~ .:.~ - - \\ .. '"".~-' ""'J:'33 ~ 1: S . ., "'.,"~ ,e; .,' ,',..~t.. ;ii4:~J,.(:\\' ::':..':", "0,'" .~;~~~.;0t;~~}~~\:i~r!'~~I:~:~~~ ~;:~:~':: ,~'" ':Ij~,;;;~;, ':l~\~~~ M of I 01 9'1 II \.D -~ O~ 61t. 91 LI 91 ~I ~-- oo(J1 "0 0 :> ,n OIS .tlJ.(;NO~ .. (Jl1 o~ o .. U1 2::': 'U 'II" Sf' ,,, - SZ.O" 2::- 11)\1\ ~ to.... ~ I .... lO 113 01\f , I "'0 "'0 !^ .. I !lo .. . UOo IJIUI 1 .. .~~: '~t~J: - -.1.~~t-~ - -:, - . ";0>"-'" :;;. ~:~~" { .. :d;~~tL~t~;,;,: ':;~:L;j~" ='- '\""J ,.,., ^M 91 LI 91 91 tl ~I ~I 9 ~ ii'7 oar; . NJ.(;NO:J 'J.t; fI~ '!i.6f - S!j.~€ F" ~I 02 61 91 LI 01>> ~ o .. ;1 :::1>> tolJl ( ~ ~ ~J "'I>> 4 I ?' + I IIl1J1 1'1>> " I I :.. x o~ I . . .", I r g~1 a:-i L 0 G 91 tl 91 9 :J::/"7 ",r; '~J.SNOJ :LS ." 9 OJ. .,,, - !i Z · OfT "'0 noC'lo () .... 0 ... <?;I>>~- I III IJI Ill.... .... .... lO lO I. I I ~ I>> I\l 0 .. Cll .. Ol>>i"w 10 IJI Ut :- !" :'lit o AlO c;.,to ;-i I v g 9 L I o fl:J :/', 0 I Si' ''tJJ.SNO:J :LS S !jf-St - 'Z-Ov NOI IAIOanS ~ ~ SM '" fI\~ '" ~ c; IqOQ kJ c;-~ ~~ FILE 'Iffi !E_~ IE ~ W IE ~ ~EC 2 0 2004) _CITY OF PORT ANGELES Uept of ~Gmm~2:t~ D~velopment SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT This Settlement Agreement is made between the City of Port Angeles, Department of Community Development, hereafter the "City', and Jacqueline M. Lmdquist, hereafter the "Owner." Parties recIte and agree as follows: 1. The Owner owns and controls the property at 1902 West Fifth Street withm the City of Port Angeles. The Owner caused a new home to be constructed on that property. 2. This Settlement is expressly limited to the facts of this case. It is not intended to establIsh precedent or to have any effect on the interpretatIOn of the City's zonmg code or development regulations outside the facts of thIS partIcular case. 3. The Owner's home was constructed on the property at 1902 West Fifth Street. As the CIty interpreted the zoning code, the buildmg exceeded the heIght limItatIOn by approximately 2.6 feet. As a result, no occupancy penmt was given to the Owner. ~ ~ y 4. The Owner contends the correct interpretation of the zoning code is that (1) the building was designed to be in compliance with the heIght restrictIOn, and (2) the buildmg is in substantial compliance. 5. Each different interpretation is supported by some language in the current and past versions of the ordmance that relates to building height. t ~ ;t ~ 6. The Owner filed with the Board of Adjustment an appeal ofthe CIty'S interpretation of the height regulation, claiming that the Owner's interpretation is con-ect and that the CIty'S mterpretation is wrong. The City responded that the Owner's interpretation of the ordinance is incorrect and that its mterpretation IS con-ect. Subsequently the partIes have agreed to resolve this dispute on the terms and condItions set out below. 7. For Its part the City will grant an occupancy pennit to the Owner. 8. In return the Owner agrees to fully comply with the following temlS and conditions: a. The Owner will dismiss the appeal now pendmg before the Board of Adjustment. -1- I'" r J f,' " . '.....,,,,.-. (Jt'" J' ~ J" ,;. i : ~~~ b. To the extent it is feasib~e to do so, the Owner will fill around the exterior of the buildmg m a manner that will decrease the "height" measurement ofthe building. c. The Owner agrees not to excavate or grade in a manner that will increase the "height" of the buildmg. d. The Owner waives and releases any and all claims and causes of action whatsoever against the City or any of Its current or past officers or employees in any way arising or resulting from any act, omission, or dispute concerning, relatmg to, or arising out ofthe determination or question ofthe height ofthe Owner's building at 1902 West Fifth Street in Port Angeles. 9. Neither party will seek costs, expenses, or damages of any type from the other. 10. This agreement is intended to be the full, final and complete settlement of all pendmg claims or claims that could have been raised or made resulting from this dispute. 11. This writing states the entire agreement of the parties relating to the subj ect matter hereof. This mcorporates and supersedes all prior discussions, negotiations and agreements. There are no other agreements, written or oral, that relate to the subject matter hereof that are separate from thIS agreement. City of Port Angeles: Owner: ,~ 1J1~ BY:~qUlst . Title: Director, Department of Community Development Date: December ~, 2004 Date: December ~, 2004 G'\Legal_Backup\AGREEMENTS&CONTRACTS\Lindquist.SettlementAgmt.12-01-04 wpd -2- l 11_~~~r:!Y_~_~lf1dq~t Final In~~e-ctfon..~~__~._._.=___ _ ~~ ____~ "~~~=-___ _ _._" _~_=~" ~.~-~-. "_"..-._ _ .~. _ ~=_- f~g~JJI l'O~ t.J bf.4 J From: To: Date: Subject: Brad Collins Lierly, James 12/27/049'55AM lindquist Final Inspection fiLE Jim, Due to the Lindquist settlement agreement, you are authorized to make the final inspection on the residence at 1902 W, 5th Brad Brad Collins, Director Department of Community Development City of Port Angeles (360) 417-4751 bcoll ins@cityofpa,us -- ~ ~ ~ t C1t ~ Qj) "'=-t ,'ool \oJ ~~ sJ.. o ~ ~ ~ CITY OF ~ORTANGELES ~.._-, - --- ~-,- -..- WAS H I N G TON, U. S. A. DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DATE: October 11, 2004 TO: FILE FROM: Board of Adjustment Brad Collins, Community Development Director ~ APPELLANT: Craig Miller, Attorney for Ms. Lindquist LOCATION: City-Wide REQUEST: Height Interpretation RECOMMENDATION: Deny the appeal and uphold the administrative interpretation of height as defined in the Port Angeles Municipal Code Title 17 Zoning and International Construction Codes, citing the attached 7 fmdings and 4 conclusions. DEPARTMENT ANALYSIS: The Board of Adjustment should limit itself to the following essential points in addressing the height interpretation appeal: 1. Clear reading of the P AMC language and a determination about any ambiguity in the specific wording; 2. Past history of interpretation and application of the height regulation; 3. Logical consequences ofthe various interpretations; 4. Merits of the appeal arguments. The Board should not concern itself with how the issue came about, who caused the issue or is to blame for any existing problem, or what the cost or consequences are related to the interpretation. The Board should simply interpret the code language for what it means with the idea that it must mean what it says. The height limitation applies City-wide to all buildings and structures, not just to one building or structure. The Zoning Code defInition of height states: Height - total distance infeetfrom average ground elevation at perimeter walls to top of sign or structure, except that television antennae, roof-mounted mechanical equipment, and other appurtenances are exempt from height requirements. (P AMC 17.08.045.B - Ordinance 2954 - 3/28/97). ~. - 4 ~ ? ~ Crt J ~ \ Board of Adjustment - HeIght Interpretation Appeal October 11, 2004 . Page 2 The City's adopted construction codes (International Building Code and International Residential Code) similarly define height restrictions and add that the measurement should be from grade plane of the average finished ground level at a point projected six feet from the perimeter walls (see attached definitions and figures). I have attached the most recent administrative interpretations made in regards to the Lindquist height concerns that were initially raised by neighbors and subsequently reviewed at length with the homeowner. In the fifteen years that I have been the City's Zoning Administrator, the average ground elevation has always referred to the average finished ground level based on a grade plane as described in the IBC. Never once during this time has the interpretation of pre-existing versus fInished or fInal grade been raised. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Notice of the requested appeal hearing was published in the Peninsula Daily News on September 24,2004 and posted on the property and sent to parties of record. on September 22,2004. Only the appellant, the City, and witnesses called by either party to the appeal may provide testimony to the Board of Adjustment at the appeal hearing. SEP A REVIEW: In accordance with Sections 197-11-800 (11) (b) and (12)(a) of the Washington Administrative Code, and Chapter 15.04 of the Port Angeles Municipal Code, the proposed Zoning Code interpretation and enforcement is categorically exempt from State Environmental Protection Act threshold determination and environmental impact statement requirements. Attachments: Findings and Conclusions IBC Building Height City 2003-2004 Interpretations *- Appellant's Appeal Letter *- City's Interpretation Arguments *- -to ~ oL~~~ ~~~0--~ ()) ~t ''iYU-L~ d- ~/ \ Board of Adjustment - HeIght InterpretatIOn Appeal October] L 2004 ,Page 3 ATTACHMENT A Recommended Findings and Conclusions for Height Interpretation Findings: Based on the staff report, public review and comment, the Board of Adjustment's discussion and deliberation, the Board of Adjustment hereby fmds that: 1. The appellant submitted an appeal of the City's adrnnistrative interpretation of the Zoning Code height defmition (Port Angeles Municipal Code Section l7.08.045(B) on September 2004. 2. The height limitation applies City-wide to all buildings and structures, not just to one building or structure. 3. The Zoning Code height defmitions states, "Height - total distance in feet from average ground elevation at perimeter walls to top of sign or structure, except that television antennae, roof- mounted mechanical equipment, and other appurtenances are exempt from height requirements." 4. The City's adopted construction codes define and describe measurement of building height in Chapter 5 of the 2003 International Building Code. 5. The appellant homeowner and the City had previously reviewed the measurement of building height, clearly understood the definition of building height, and agreed on how the building height was measured. 6. Notice of the requested appeal hearing was published in the Peninsula Daily News on September 24, 2004 and posted on the property and sent to parties of record. on September 22, 2004. 7. In accordance with Sections 197-11-800 (11) (b) and (12)(a) of the Washington Administrative Code, and Chapter 15.04 of the Port Angeles Municipal Code, the proposed Zoning Code interpretation and enforcement is categorically exempt from State Environmental Protection Act threshold determination and environmental impact statement requirements. Conclusions: Based on the staff report, public review and comment, the Board of Adjustment's discussion and deliberation, and the above listed fmdings, the Board of Adjustment hereby concludes that: A. The language in PAMe 17.08.045(B) is clear and consistent with the City's construction codes in defining the average ground elevation as the average fmished ground level of the grade plane, and there is no reason for any ambiguity in making this interpretation of the specific wording relative to preconstruction site grades. B. The past history of building height interpretation by the City for hundreds of structures and the application of the height regulation to the case in point sufficiently establish the average ground elevation to mean the average ground elevation compared to the perimeter walls of the fmished structure. C. The logical consequences of an interpretation of an average ground elevation other than the average fmished ground level of the grade plane would be to disconnect the measurement of the building height from the ground elevation that would exist when the structure is built and thereby Board of Adjustment - HeIght InterpretatIOn Appeal October] 1, 2004 . Page 4 eliminate the measurement of the building height from the ground that exists when the building exists. D. Therefore, the merits ofLhe appeal arguments are unfounded, and finding for the appeal is contrary to the intent of the Zoning Code and International Building Code. T'\V AR\2004\helght app.wpd :NERAL BUILDING HEIGHTS AND AREAS A..SEIv:IENT. Tha.t portlOn of a buildmg that IS partly 01 com- letely below grade plane (See "Story above grade plane" 111 ,ec.tlOll 202.) A baseme11l shall be consldeled as a story above ,lude plane whele the 1111lshed surface of the floor above the Jasement IS' More than 6 feet (18::>'9 111111) above grade plane, 2. More thaD 6 feet (1829 111m) above thl: f1l11Shed grouDd level for 1110le than 50 percent ofthe total bmlding penme- ter, or 3. More than 12 feet (3658 111111) above the fuushed ground level at any pomL ..~:. ThiS definition parallels that of "Story above grade plane" (see Chapter 2). The determination of whether a basement meets the definition of "Story above grade ':. plane" is Important because it contributes to the height ;: of a building in regard to Table 503 and the total allow- :~: able area of the building In accordance WIth Sections ;:'.503.1.1 and 503.3. Every story with the finished floor r entirely above grade (finished ground level) is a story \f.~ above grade In addItIon, three specifiC criteria in the ,~~ defmition establish the threshold at which a basement [:.,,, extends far enough above ground to contribute to the ;?' regulated height of the building in number of stones. ~~, Figure 502.1 (2) describes the application of these ;~. criteria. t' f:- r_ i ,GRADE PLANE. A-reference plane representlllg the average ~~, of fimshed ground level ad j OlJllIlg the buildmg at exterior walls ~ Where the fimshed ground level slopes away froID the exterior If .walls, the reference plane shall be established by the lowest :."'P0111tS WIthill the area between the buildmg and the lot hne or, a \ where the lot line IS more than 6 feet (1829 mID) from the build- ~" ing, between the building and a point 6 feet (1829 rum) from the i~':, bmldmg. \rrJt: ~_'.:. This term is used in the definitions of "Basement" and ~if' "Story above grade plane." It IS critical in determining ~~~~ the height of a building and the number of stories above ~f~ grade, which are regulated by this chapter. Since the i,~" finished ground surface adjacent to the bUilding may [!;;t vary (depending on site conditions), the mean average !:<~',:', taken at vanous pOints around the building constitutes ~"c!, the grade plane. One method of determining the grade G<' plane elevation IS illustrated In Figure 502.1 (3), where ,'1 ,".' the ground slopes uniformly along the length of each ex- ~" < 'I , tenor wall fl. ~~l' ;~', Situations may arise where the ground adjacent to ~' the bUIlding slopes away from the building because of site or landscaping conSiderations In this case, the low- est finished ground level at any pOint between the build- ing's extenor wall and a pOint 6 feet (1829 mm) from the building [or the lot Ime, If closer than 6 feet (1829 mm)] comes under consideration. These points are used to determine the elevation ofthe grade plane as Illustrated in Figures 502 1 (4) and 502.1 (5). In the context of the code, the term "grade" means the finished ground level at the exterior walls. While the grade plane is a hypothetical horizontal plane derived as indicated above, the grade is that which actually ex- '" r" ~ t' ;~~-, _, ____ ...___....,.'''.'A' RIll! DING CODE(!,COMMENTARY FIGURE 502 1(2) STORY 8 STORY J.. ---r 10'-0" TYP ---'- I GREATER THAN 6'-0" ~ .,- GRADE PLAI-lE _ _ _ _ ,j ,,- GRADE ----"'-r - .- .:.....--= BASEhAENT - (A) THE BASEMEIH IS A STORY ABOVE GRADE PLAI-lE BECAUSE THE FLOOR OF STORY I- IS MORE THAN 6'-0" ABOVE GRADE PLAhJE STORY B 110'.0" TYP ~ STORY A _______ GRADE PLANE ~ I I-GRADE \. ---r-----=~ \ L / \ 7' O' BASEMENT ...l. . 7~-0"S (B) THE BASEME,"T IS A STORY ABOVE GRADE PLANE BECAUSE THE FLOOR OF STORY A IS MORE THAN 6'-0" ABOVE FI,"ISHED GROUND LEVEL FOR MORE THAN 50 PERCENT OF THE BUILDING PERIMETER r10'-0" GRADEl \ STORY B ~ BASEMENT NO.1 BASEMENT NO ? --r 16'-0" ~ ...............- ,/' (C) BASEMENT NO 1 IS A STORY ABOVE GRADE PLANE BECAUSE THE FLOOR OF STORY A IS MORE THAN 12'-0" ABOVE FINISHED GROUI,D LEVEL AT ONE POINT For 81 1 Inch = 25 4 mm, 1 foot = 304.8 mm Figure 502.1 (2) STORY ABOVE GRADE ists or is intended to exist at the completion of site work. The only situation where the grade plane and the grade are identical IS when the site 1S perfectly level for a diS- tance of 6 feet (1829 mm) from a\l extenor walls. HEIGHT, BUILDING. The vertical distance from grade plane to the average height of the hIghest roof surface. .:. This definition establishes the two points of measure- ment that determine the height of a building In feet. This measurement is used to determine compliance with the building height limItations of Section 503 1 and Table 503, as well as other sections of the code where the height of the buildmg'is a factor in the requirements (for example, see Section 1406.2.2). The lower point of measurement is the grade plane (see the definition of "Grade plane" above). The upper pOint of measurement is the roof surface of the building, with consideration given to sloped roofs (such as a hip or gable roof). In the case of sloped roofs, the average 5-3 5-5 GENERAL BUILDING HEIGHTS AND AREAS FIGURE 502.1(3) - FIGURE 502.1(4) height would be used as the upper point of measure- ment, rather than the eave line or the ndge Ime The av- erage height of the roof IS the mid-heIght between the roof eave and the roof ndge, regardless of the shape of the roof. This definition also indicates that buildmg height IS measured to the highest roof surface In the case of a bUlldmg with multiple roof levels, the highest of the van- ous roof levels must be used to determme the buildmg height. If the highest of the vanous roof levels IS a sloped roof, then the average height of that sloped roof must be used, The average height of multiple roof levels is not to be used to determine th'e building height. A penthouse IS not intended to affect the measure- ment of buildmg height By defmitlon, a "Penthouse" IS a structure that IS built above the roof of a building (see Section 1502 1). The distance that a bUilding extends above ground also determmes the relative hazards of that bUlldmg. Simply stated, a taller building presents relatively greater safety hazards than a shortel' building for sev- eral reasons, Including fire service access and time for occupant egress. The code specifically defines how bUlldmg height IS measured to enable vanous code re- qUirements, such as type of construction and fire sup- pression, to be consistent with those relative hazards. [see Figure 502.1 (6) for the computation of building height m terms of feet and stones]. STREET , I -------+-- ELEVATION : 4965' 1 , , , , , ELEVATION ~ 496.5' j---'" : 1 1 , , , 1 ! 1 1 BUILDING : 1 1 , 1 1 1 1 ' , ' 1 ' , 1 1 1 J-------- ---+- ELEVATION ELEVATION ____ : : 490 0' 4920' : I t___________________________________________J 1t NORTH J- '.AA~Ilr'=' 1_____________1 ....- ~' For 51. AVERAGE GRADE ELEVATION AT EACH EXTERIOR WALL NORTH 496 5' WEST 494.25' SOUTH 491 0' EAST 49325' 19750 1975 0/4 = 493 75' THAT IS ELEVATION OF GRADE PLANE ELEVATION VIEW 1 foot = 304.8 mm. Figure 502.1 (3) DETERMINATION OF GRADE PLANE ELEVATION WHEN GRADE SLOPES UNIFORMLY ALONG THE ENTIRE LENGTH OF THE EXTERIOR WALLS 6'-0" OR LOT LINE WHICHEVER IS LESS THE GRADE ELEVATION THAT IS USED IN DETERMINING THE GRADE PLANE ELEVATION IS 4875' ELEVATION 4900' ) ( i ~ / ELEVATION :;/ 4875' . " I / I ' / I ~ I ,;';; I 1./ I //... : // :/1 ~/"fl/'" , /1 / ,/ I I I " '.. , " For 51' 1 Inch = 25 4 mm, 1 foot = 304.8 mm Figure 502.1(4) DETERMINATION OF GRADE PLANE WHERE GRADE SLOPES AWAY FROM THE EXTERIOR WALL ')nn~ II\JTFRNATIONAL BUILDING CODE@ COMMENTARY .~I . ;,1 " ~ ,1 ," " :) ,; ,I ~;} )1- ,,~ ~~ i ~, "/T. ~- . I .~ GENERAL BUILDING HEIGHTS AND AREAS FIGURE 5021 (5) - FIGURE 502 1 (6) i;....."., -._... ~ -- r':,,-. ~T~,l , f~,. . For 51. ,I!~: ' 'I ~:.:~~. 1:~ .-,' ~r-""~ ......- " 1:1, ' fd:~ ,!",~\"'...,...,. ......... ~~-,,~:~ ' ~~~' rJ~\:) {J'., \1', ~ - ~-;, , t' ~,1, - ~ ;:J.',- ,I J' !,- _ 1 j:, :~. t_:l".,;!.. : 1..! --: : t "- ;;-;,~ '~~ - "-,,";"1 ~ - ,to l~~i;i::r ' , rl~~f:~::i :, :; 'For 51' ,\1 ;. ~'i ELEVATION 498.5'--;; ; I , , ELEVATIOloJ J 4965' ELEVATION 4980'7 , , I , ~_____ ELEVATION -- I 496 5' I J I I 6'-0"l j I 1 STREET -j- NORTH BUILDING ~J ~ , J " , I I J ~ -----+-- ELEVATION ~~~~~TION ~i _______ j --------------------------------.l~OE:EVATION 4880' t 6'-0" ELEVATION 490 0' GRADE PLANE1 AVERAGE GRADE ELEVATION AT EACH EXTERIOR WALL NORTH (496.5 + 496.5)/2 = 496 50 WEST (4965 + 490 0)/2 = 493.25 L_ / GRADE SOUTH (490 0 + 488 0)/2 = 489 00 I EAST (496.5 + 4880)/2 = 492 25 ELEVATiON VIEW /-<;';<,., 197100/4 = 492 75' /~<'/ THAT is ELEVATION OF GRADE PLANE 1mch = 25 4 mm, 1 foot = 304 8 mm. Figure 502.1(5) DETERMINATION OF GRADE PLANE ELEVATION WHERE GRADE DOES NOT SLOPE UNIFORMLY ALONG THE LENGTH OF THE EXTERIOR WALLS 12'-0" BUILDING HEIGHT = 1 STORY AND 12'-0" ,/ ' """ ,\ , ....,/} r GRADE PLANE GRADE .1 ----------.-----. -- 2'-0" 1D'-D"TIP t BUILDING HEIGHT = 5 STORIES AND 48'-0" STORY 4 STORY 3 GRADE - STORY 2 GRADE PLANE \ STORY 1 (UPPER BASEMENT MEETS I -.( . r DEFINITION OF STORY 1 j I BASEMENT, I ABOVE GRADE P'LANE) ._.-~._.- - -,-'-' ._.- 2'-0" r-- C~~~~~-~~~~~~_:~ 1 inch = 25 4 mm, 1 foot = 304.8 mm. Figure 502.1 (6) BUILDING HEIGHT 5-5 CJTYOF ~ORTANGELES o ~ ~ ~ ... .... . - ~----~ ~ .--- WAS H I N G TON, U. S. A. DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNiTY DEVELOPMENT DATE: August 6, 2004 To: Administrative Interpretation File Bmd Collins, Community Development Director '~ C~ FROM: RE: DEPARTMENTAL INTERPRETATION- In applying the Zoning Code regulations for the maximum building height of the new residence being constructed at 1902 W. 5th Street (the Lindquist residence). Staff consistently interpreted the defInition of building height to be measured from the average fmished or fmal grade at the perimeter walls of the structure. This interpretation has been in practice since before I began work for the City of Port Angeles in 1989. This interpretation of how maximum building height under the City's Zoning Code is measured was provided by letters to the property owner and a neighboring resident in November and December, 2003 (attached). The issue only arose due to the marking of the average preconstruction grade of the construction site by the City's Building Official in February, 2003. Subsequently, the construction site was excavated for the foundation but apparently not designed for backfill to the average grade on which the maximum height of the house was calculated. The primary reason that the interpretation cannot be changed from the practice of the average fInished or fInal grade to a preconstruction grade is that the maximum building height then would be unrelated to the actual fInal building height, defeating the purpose and intent of the Zoning Code, the specifIc height regulation, and how it can be measured after construction. It was not normal for the Building Official to have established an average preconstruction grade for the purposes of the Zoning Code. Based on this experience, the City's Building Official will not be establishing an average preconstruction grade that can be misunderstood in the future. ~ORTANGELES File WAS H ] N G TON, U. S. A. DEPART/v1ENT OF C0/v1/v1UN1TY DEVELOPMENT December 29, 2003 Mr. Scott Collins 1901 W. 5th Street ,'.' Port Angeles, W A 98363 Re: Response to Your December 23rd Letter Dear Mr. Collins: :~::.:;;; . ,.' ' . ':..' In response to your December 23, 2003, letter, the following answers each of your questions' as best ::,~::; ',.;:" "as I know them; regarding the house under construction at 1902 W. 5th Street. ~:~r/: . ",~,- e " .'::::<[,: ~,~:, 'Why was the "benchmarkll placed by the curb in February 2003 -on the City right-ai-way at the 1/3 " >.~,~ - , .~ 'mark of the property between th'e 5/6 Alley and W 5th Street? ~ -'--~~ , ,~ " ,+ " ';~,~ ,: ~;~~~ ;'-, r ":,- City Building Official Lou Haehnlen placed a'mark identifYing the average grade of the site before any excavation or grading at the request of the builder. Mr. Haehnlen placed the mark near the curb where he must have thought the av.erage grade. ~f the slogigg site ~as best represented and would not be disturbed during the site work and construction. - r. ,t , - " - + ,-- .-- - ,'-- :. ~'- " , , ., Can the City right-ai-way be part of the average grade? The average grade of the site includes only the area of the site and not any of . the area in the. City right-of-way. The average grade for determination of the height of a building is measured from around the perimeter walls of the building. Regardless of the pre-existing grade of the site, the building height is measured from the :5nal grade around the periineter walls of tbe finished building. In this case the building was, built to a :5nal grade planned to be at the mark set by the City Building Official at the request of the builder. \.Vhere the mark is does not matter, it is the elevation of the fmal grade as approved and constructed that determines the height of the building. )iFhere was the second IIbenchmark" located when the City measured the building height at 32.5 feet, and how does that change the height of the house? The four comers of the house were the marks that were averaged to calculate the average grade around the perimeter walls of the house. When the City Public Works staff measured the building height at 32.56 feet, they used the average grade around the perimeter walls of house at the excavated grade not the final grade as approved by the City Building Official. 321 EAST FIFTH STREET · PO BOX 1 150 · PORT ANGELES, WA 98362-3206 PHONE: 360-417-4750. FAX; 360-417-4711 · TTY. 360-417-4645 E-MAIL.PLANNING@CI.PORT-ANGELES.WAUSORPERIYilTS@CI.PORT-ANGELESW~.US ,~ Response 10 Scott Collins Lener December 29,2003 Page 2 The change in the measured height of the house from 32.56 fee to 30 feet was based on the change from the excavated construction grade to the approved fmal grade which is yet to be established because the construction is not yet completed. 11lhy was the "benchmark" not placed at 70 feet, or midvvay between the 5/6 Alley and W 5th Street? Because the site slopes from the 5/6 Alley down to W. 5th Street, the midpoint between the alley and the street was not the average .grade. Most of the site is higher than the portion closest to W. 5th Street, and the mark was set where the average of the slope/grade existed prior to excavation and grading during construction. The City Building Official made a judgment about the elevation of the average grade of the site before excavation and grading and about the location to mark the site where it would not be disturbed during construction. " . Why on the 9117103 measure was the average grade calculated at 104.87 feet, and why on the 101-31103 measure was the average grade changed to 107.27 feet? The 104".87 feet was measured based on the excavated grade of the site during construction, and the 107.2 7 feet was measured based on the elevation of both the Building Official's mark and the finished ground floor lev~l set at the Building Official's mark. The building plans were approved by the Building Official for a house"ihatwas-30-feet"above-fue--fini"shed " ground floor level and the average grade established by the Building OfficiaL . . Are there any laws/codes that state, the first, original Februal)J 2003 "benchmark" overrides all others? The Port Angeles Municipal Code and the Uniform Building Code which are both adopted as law by the City of Port Angeles provide that the City Building Official approves building plans that determine the height of the building and the grading of the site. Since the City Building Official approved the building plans for the house at 3 0 feet above the fInished ground floor level and marked the site for the builder to set the fmished ground floor level, that mark and elevation of I 07.27 feet establish the fInal average grade at the perimeter walls of the house when completed. Any other marks lised in measuring the average grade are overridden by the City Building Official's approved building plans and February 2003 mark. JiVhen I add on in a few years, can I then place a "benchmark" on the highest 1/3 of my property at the curb on the City right-ofway, which is approximately 3 feet higher than average grade, allowing my house to eve71 higher? You, like everyone else, must apply to the City for a building permit to make a structural improvement to a residential building. ~t that time, the City Building Official will review Response to Scott Collills Letter December 29,2003 Page 3 and can approve the height of your house above the average fmal grade at the peweter walls around your house and approve a mark establishing that grade. It may be that the mark will be at one third of the distance between W. 5th Street and the 4/5 Alley if your site is sloped accordillgly. However, that mark will not be 3 feet higher than the average fInal grade so established. I know that you have put a lot of time into understanding the height of your neighbor's house, and so has the CitY. I hope that these answers to your questions help to malee your understanding clear. Sincerely, ~~~ 'Brad Collins, ~ommunity Development, Director cc: Craig,Knutson, City Attorney Jim Lierly, Building Inspector i~~~..~._~.~::~_ - - .- CITY OF o I20RTANGELES '~,'"".:."". . ~ WAS H ] N G TON, U.S. A DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT December 22, 2003 " -- Mr. Scott Collins 1905 W. 5th Street Port Angeles, W A 98363 " -,-~ -:-i:"_'_ '_:' ~',(l " 'r, Re: Difference in Interpretations of the Height of the House at 1902 S. 5th Street , , I ' ~_ '" I .' " ' ': ' Dear Mr. Collins: ~\:u.':. In response to your request, this letter tries to explain the difference in the City's ti~,~~,,' ,,: ~ ;',':' interpretations of the height of the house under construction at 1902 W. 5th Street. :f~~'~~~~: " ,,;>~', 'On October 10, 2003, Building Inspector Jim Lierly's letter to Ms. Lindquist stated that ~{{~i}~\ ':"~';'\' the height of her house was 32.59 feet above the average grade, which exceeded the 30 foot 1__; ~, ',~_ , , (f:;--:'::f.: ,",' "', ::~..' height limit in the Zoning Code. This measurement was based the average ground elevation at ',~{ '::,:' , ~'::", the perimeter walls of the house and of the site, too, as surveyed by the City Engineering ,:;',,;~ _c. "~:~,, Department. ,,:,:.":, .. ' "" In response to that letter, Ms. Lindquist and her representatives identified an average . ;':' :." ~,," grade elevation mark set by the City Building Official Lou Haehnlen before the building site was }~f:~;:~:' . ~;;, .{:.- ,excavated. Based,on that mark, the City Engineering Department remeasured the buildigg)leight ;JJ~~i~;.~ ':l0? and d~termined that m~ house would be 30.19 feet above' Lou's mark on me site as well as the ' ~f,'~~,' ~ ..,)~~;: finished ground floor level of the house. This information was communicated to Ms. Lindquist', ;;:E(', ':, in a November 17,2003, letter from Mr. Lierly. I wrote a second letter to Ms. Lindquist dated t:~~(", :,,'::~ November 24,2003, clarifying that the finish grade of the site at the perimeter walls of the house '::~\\,~~' ',,;,' must be brought up on average 2.56 feet, making the building height at 30.0 feet above the.final ,~ , ,', .. . , " grade around the perimeter walls. '.', ", ,," . Vilhat confused everyone was the need to replace all the dirt that was excavated around : ",::,', the house. This back:fill is necessary to reach the 30 foot building height approved in the '; , _' ',' ~,? building permit plans. The City uses the final grade in measuring building height, and how much '."";' '.. replacement of excavated soils was to be done was not obvious on October 10,2003. Also at the time of the October 10,2003, letter, staff was not aware of the average grade elevation mark set .' by Mr. Haehnlen, since he had left the City's employ in March, 2003. I hope this explains the discrepancy in the City's statements about the building height that has concerned you greatly. The City has worked hard to address this concern, which others in . , your neighborhood also have. If you have other questions, please feel free to bring them to our attentlOn. Sincerely, 1 ~~-J- ~ I v Brad Collins, Community Deyelopment Director 321 EAST FIFTH STREET · PO BOX 1150 · PORT ANGELES, WA ~8362-3206 PHONE- 360-417-4750 · FAX: 360-417-471 1 ~ TTY: 360-417-4645 E-MAIL.PLANN1NG@C1PORT-ANGELES.WA.USORPERMlTS@C1.PORT-ANGELES.WA.US Administrative Interpretation December 18, 2003 Title 17 Zoning Code, Chapter 17.08 DefInitions, Section 17.08.045(B) Height - total distance in feet from average ground elevation at perimeter walls to top of sign or structure, except that television antennae, roof mounted mechanical equipment, and other appurtenances are exempt from height requirements. "Average ground elevation" referred to in defInition of height P AMC 17.08 is the average final grade per the approved building permit. ~' ~ Br d Collins Community Development Director ~ r'\ n '"1' A 1\. T I' 1: T T':' ("'1 1"'" V I\. 1 .fJf. \I \J n L n ;:) w ,6.. 5 H I N G TON, USA DEPARTM ENT OF COMM UNITY DEVELOPM ENT November 24, 2003 J aquelme Lindquist 182 Rose Lane Port Angeles, WA 98362 Re: Building height and average ground elevation of new construction at 1902 W. 5th Street Dear Ms. Lindquist: I am following up on the November 17,2003, letter that you received from City Building Inspector Jim LIerly and our discussion last week on-site about the heIght of your new resIdence and the average ground elevation of your lot at 1902 W. 5th Street. The City did come to the conclusion that the structure has been built to a height of 30.19 feet above the ground floor level and above the mark established by former City Building Official Lou Haehnlen as the preconstruction average ground elevation on the subject site. The current average ground elevation of the slte was measured by CIty Public Works Engineering staff as 2.37 feet below the fmished ground floor level of the residence and Mr. Haehnlen's mark. Therefore, for the building height to meet the Zoning Code height-limitatlOn-ofj'O-fe-et, -thefif:1lsh graaeof the site at the perimeter walls of house must be brought up on average 2.56 feet (.19 feet + 2.37 feet). We will provide final framing inspection after modification, if any is needed, to the foundation and/or wood siding that will allow for the necessary backfilling to accomplish the established fimsh grade for the house. I appreciate your cooperation with my staff in establishing the average ground elevation set by Mr. Haehnlen to avoid the question of the planned finish grade. If you have any questions, please contact either Mr. Lierly or me. SintCerelY, \ ~~Gx~ Br d Collins, Community Development Director cc: Jim Lierly, Building Inspector 321 EAST FIFTH STREET · PO BOX 1150 · PORT ANGELES, WA 98362-3206 PHONE' 360-417-4750. FAX. 360-417-4711 · TTY. 360-417-4645 E-MAIL PLANNING@CIPORT-ANGELESWA.USORPERMITS@CIPORT-ANGELESWA.US Miller & Shefler, P.S. A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CORPORATION ATTORNEYS AT LAW Craig L. Miller Jane Cantor Shefler Christopher O. Shea I-IAND DELIVERED ~U~lE~\VllE~ AUG 2 7 2004 August 27,2004 Brad Collins PORT ANGELES PLANNING DEPARTMENT P. O. Box 1150 Port Angeles, WA 98362 CITY OF PORT ANGELES Dept of Community Development " RE: LINDQUIST PROPERTY AT 1902 WEST FIFTH STREET REQUEST FOR REVIEW OF DIRECTOR'S INTERPRETATION Dear Brad: On behalf of my client, Jacqui Lindquist, and pursuant to PAMC 17.96.080, I am appealing for a further interpretation by the Board of Adjustment, your decision as Planning Director in regard to the definition of "height", as it is currently being applied to the Lindquist residence at the above address. Factually, there is a bit of a tangled trail underlying this request. My client first had a benchmark of the average height for her lot established by Lou Haenhlan, the then building inspector for the City. This benchmark was established based on the pre- construction height of the lot. During construction, the property was excavated, and the building's height was adjusted so as not to exceed thirty feet above the pre-detemuned benchmark. The specific language of the zoning ordinance height definition is as follows, P AMC 17.08.045(B.): "Height-total distance in feet from average ground elevation at perimeter walls to top of sign or structure, except the television antelmae, roof-mounted mechanical equipment, and other appurtenances are exempt from height requirements." The City is now interpreting the "height" calculation to be from the excavated level, not the benchmark determined using the pre-construction grade. With that interpretation, the building is almost 32 feet "high". It is however, merely an inch or so higher than thirty feet "high" when using the original grade of the property. There are two issues to be considered in regard to the Lindquist residence: 711 East Front Street, Suite A . Port Angeles, WA 98362 (360) 457-3349 . (360) 457-3379 Fax e-mail: attomeys@mi11ershefler.com Brad COlllllS PORT ANGELES PLANNING DEPARTMENT August 27,2004 Page 2 1 The City, through its agent 1,,11'. H aenhl en, established a benclmlark to determine the height of the house. 111S more thal1 inequnable for the City, at this tUlle, to reverse that deClsion, and to thereby cause my client thousands of dollars of costs for conection of the CIty'S error. 2. The city's interpretation, in regard to the Lindquist residence, is that the height must be measured from the ground elevation at the perimeter walls of the residence as built. In the instance of the Lilldquist property, an excavation was fIrst made on the property, and the residence built ill that excavation. The illterpretation relIed upon results ill a reduction ill the height available for use on the property from what would otherwise be permitted, particularly if excavation were mimmized to allow maximum height use. Thus, If Ms. Lindquist had not excavated her property to facilitate construction, she could exceed the height which she IS presently being told is the maximum allowable. The current illterpretation, ill the specifIc factual situation which exists, is punitive to Ms. Lilldquist's chosen method of construction, as opposed to what is otherwise allowed under the zoning ordillance. For these reasons, it is requested that this matter be reviewed by the Board of Adjustment, to determine whether the director's decision is correct ill tins case. Very truly yours, MILLER & SHEA, P.S. ~ CLM/llw cc: J acqui Lindquist Board of Adjustment - Height InterpretatIOn Appeal October I I, 2004 Page 5 Alternative Interpretation Arguments: While every use of words may be tested for ambiguity, the specific language, history of application, and logical consequences inherent in the interpretation, in my opinion, leave little llilibiguity or merit to the appellant's arguments (which are attached). Nonetheless, I will endeavor to provide alternative arguments to those of Mr. Miller for interpreting the specific language of the Zoning Code. What does PAMC 17.08.045.B say about the Zoning Code definition of height? The definition of height is as follows: Height - total distance in feet from average ground elevation at perimeter walls to top of sign or structure, except that television antennae, roof-mounted mechanical equipment, and other appurtenances are exempt from height requirements. (P AMC 17.08.045.B - Ordinance 2954 - 3/28/97) "Average ground elevation at perimeter walls" implies that any measUfement of a structure's height must occur where the ground and perimeter walls meet. Height is a measure of "a structure" from the ground. Without a structure, there can be no such measurement. So, measurement must be based on the structure and the ground as viewed after construction has occurred. "Other appurtenances are exempt from height requirements" implies that certain appurtenances are not considered in the measurement of height. In this case, the roof ridge is not an appurtenance but an integral part of the structure. More complicated would be the pointy top of the turret style roof, where it could be argued that the point is insignificant in the height and not necessary for the structure of the roof or an integral part of the structure itself. For example, steeples may be exceptions to height requirements. Although this is not an issue at this time, it helps to illustrate that the specific language normally has some ambiguity. Nonetheless, the appellant's argument that because the Zoning Code height definition does not say "average finished or final grade" that the average ground elevation could be measured ultimately as preconstruction grade without the basis of the structure associated with the finished or final grade is not acceptable. Logically, without a connection between the finished structure and the finished grade, the effect of the height restriction in the Zoning Code would be rendered useless, since the height to the beholder would not necessarily correspond to the visual perception of height. In this case a structure that is 32.5 feet above the average ground elevation at the perimeter walls would be interpreted to be 30 feet in height above the preconstruction average grade of the site before any excavation or building occurred. Finally, the City Department of Community Development has consistently interpreted the height of structures as measured from the average final grade after construction of any structure. This point was made clear to the appellants and the complaining neighbors. Nearly a year ago, the issue had been resolved with the agreement of the homeowner to backfill against the structure to an average final grade consistent with the preconstruction grade to which the finished ground floor of the structure was built with an allowance of30 feet to the top of the structure's roof ridge. While height limitations are a frequent concern for many structures built in Port Angeles, the appellant's interpretation has never been at issue before. It is difficult to imagine how disconnecting the height of the finished structure from the finished grade can make other measurements meet the intent of the Zoning Code to limit height. Board of Adjustment - Height Interpretation Appeal October 11,2004 . Page 6 When the issue was raised at the end of2003, the City revised the definition of height to remove any ambiguity in the Zoning Code. The height definition now states: Height - total distance in feet from average ground elevation at perimeter walls as determined bv the [mal grade noted on the building ulan approved by the City (as long as the final grade is not higher than existing pre-alteration grade at the center of the lot) to the top of sign or the structure, except that television antennae, roof-mounted mechanical equipment, chimneys. and other appurtenances are exempt from height requirements. Other appurtenances include architectural features. such as ornamental cupolas. domes. and spires. not exceeding ten feet in height and diameter. which are also exempt from height requirements. (P AMC 17.08.045.B - Ordinance 3155 - 1/30/04) The question now before the Board of Adjustment is whether the previous definition of height can be reasonably interpreted as requested by the appellant. The answer is no, and it was not so interpreted by owner when the height issue was resolved in November 2003. During the discussions with the owner in 2003 as the house was being built, the height of the building became a concern when investigation of complaints by neighbors determined that the house was over the 30 foot height limitation despite an earlier redesign required when it was discovered that the architectural plans were over height. Once the building plans were revised, it was not obvious that "the disconnect between the structure from the ground elevation," as proposed by the appellants, would make the house more than 30 feet in height. Not being able to visually relate the structure height to the ground elevation is the very reason why making such an interpretation is not reasonable. After the owner became aware of the building height-ground elevation problem, she agreed to backfill the grade to the design of the house and the existing pre-alteration ground elevation benchmark, since that was what her argument and the appellant's interpretation would require. The nature ofthis interpretation appeal is why agreeing to such an interpretation does not work in implementing the height limitation. In the first place we agreed to follow this interpretation in backfilling to the pre-existing benchmark. Second, it was not until the owner had difficulty in modifying the structure to accept the backfill did the interpretation issue of average final grade become important. And finally, if one cannot relate the structure height to the eventual ground elevation, then the height limitation will not mean 30 feet unless the point of reference for measuring the 30 feet is related to where the structure meets the ground. No matter how you cut it or fill it, the height of a structure must be measured from the ground elevation of the finished construction site for the interpretation to be meaningful to a limitation. ----~ ~- West!av\~ 417P.2d 849 69 Wash2d 171,417 P.2d 849 (Cite liS: 69 Wash.2d 171, 417 P.2d 849) c Supreme Court ofWashmgton, Department 2 Henry OPENDACK and Joan Worthy Opendack, ills wife, Appellants, v. Sylvester MADDING, Phillip H Darland, doing busmess as Pacific Home Remondeling Company, Respondents No. 38186. Aug 25, 1966. Suit by property owners to enJom construction of accessory building upon adjacent property in alleged vlOlatlOn of resIdentlal zoning ordmances. The Superior Court, Kmg County, Ross R Rakow, J., rendered judgment for builder denymg permanent injunctlon and property owners appealed The Supreme Court, Donworth, J., held that concluslOn of law that proposed buildmg complIed WIth zonmg requrrement that buildmg be only one story and not more than 12 feet high was not supported by findmg of fact as to height of buildmg from grade level as reqmred by ordmance. Judgment vacated and case remanded with directions. West Headnotes [1] Zoning and Planning JI:=790 414k790 Most CIted Cases Under ordinance lrmiting accessory buildings m back yard of resldentlal lots to not over 12 feet in height from lot's grade to highest point ofbuildmg, finding that building was Within l2-foot height hmlt without fmdmg as to height of buildmg from lot grade or average finIshed grade of buildmg did not sustain conclusion of law that buildmg did not constimte vlOlation of zoning ordinance and that buildmg permit was Issued m accordance with zomng ordmance. [2] Zoning and Planning [::;=789 4l4k789 Most CIted Cases Under zonmg ordmance lImiting height of accessory buildmgs 1D back yard of resIdential lots to 12 feet m height measured from lot grade of bUlldmg to hIghest pomt of building, where height of bmldmg was determmed by measuring only Sidewalls instead of averagmg grade levels measured at center of each of four walls, measurements did C,e::>e.- -;7 /')M .~ -X:::.- ,.,--V" (I T-v -C4 f../;::se.- Page 1 not sustain fmdmg of fact and conclUSIOn of law that buildmg was wlthm 12-foot height limit and not m v101atlOn ofzomng Oldinance 13] Zoning and Planning C;:;>-790 4l4k790 Most CIted Cases Under ordmance lumting height of accessory bmldmgs m back yard of residentIal lots to 12 feet from lot grade of building, determmatlOn of heIght of buildmg IS pmely matter of mathematical computation and does not mvolve welghmg of conflIctmg testimony concemmg measurements or dIsputed mterpretation of plans. 14] Appeal and Error (;:;:;;>-1177(8) 30k1l77(8) Most Cited Cases (Formerly 30k177(8)) Where fmding of fact that buildmg dId not exceed 12-foot height lImit of zomng code did not appear to be based upon formula prescribed in code for determining height of building, cause was remanded because of madequacy of matenal findmgs offact *171 **850 Henry P. Opendack, Seattle, for appellants Ferris & Fox, Richard A. Fox, Seattle, for respondents. DONWORTH, Judge. Plaintiffs appeal from the Judgment of the trial court dismissing plamtJffs' petition for a permanent mjunction and dlssolvmg a temporary injunction against defendants The temporary mjunctlon forbade the further construction of an accessory buildmg on defendant Maddmg's city residential property, which is unmediately uphill *172 from and adjacent to plamtiffs Opendacks' reSidence The temporary mJunction remains in effect during this appeal, according to the record of the tnal court. The Opendacks and Mr. Madding live m an area which IS zoned RS 5000. In such an area, the zomng ordinances of the City of Seattle permIt the erection of an accessory buildmg m the back yard of such reSidential lots if the buildmg conforms to the following proVISIOn: 2644.060 Yard--Exceptions permlttmg accessory buildmgs to certain reqUIred yards in R zones (a) A one Story Garage, Carport or other permitted Accessory Building not over twelve feet in height and not over one thousand square feet in area may be erected in a Rear Yard, '" * *. The definitIOns in the zoning code provide: 26 06.030 * * * Copr. @ 2004 West. No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt Works. \t\Testlavv: . 417 P.2d 849 69 Wash.2d 171,417 P 2d 849 (Cite as: 69 Wash.2d 171,417 P.2d 849) BASEMENT That portIOn of a Bmldmg between floor and cellmg whIch IS partly below and partly above the Grade but so located that the vertical dIstance from the Grade to the flom below IS less than the ventcal distance from Grade to ceilmg A Basement shall be -counted as a Story 26 06.040 .. .. * CELLAR. That ponton of a Buildmg between floor and ceihng wluch IS fully below Grade or partly below and partly above Grade but so located that the vertIcal dIstance from the Grade to the floor below IS more than the vertIcal dIstance from the Grade to cellmg. A Cellar shall not be counted as a Story. 26.06 090 .. .. * HEIGHT OF BillLDING The vertical dIstance from the Lot Grade of the Guilding to the highest pomt of the coping of a flat roof or to the decklme of a mansard roofed Buildmg or to the point wruch is located one-half (1/2) the dIstance between the plate Ime and the ridge hne of the lughest gable of a pItch or hipped roofed Building December 26, 1963, Mr. Maddmg obtamed (through hIS builder or arcilltect) a buildmg permit from the CIty of Seattle wluch authonzed the constructIOn of a three-car garage at the alley level (at the **851 rear ohhe lot) WIth a hobby shop above the garage The single-car garage on the ""173 SIte ofthe new buildmg was taken down, and one SIde wall of the old garage was used in part for the new garage The lots in this area slope sharply from the house down toward the alley. The entrance to the garage 15 at alley level facing the alley The entrance to the hobby shop on the upper level IS a foot or two above the lot facmg the house At the start of the constructIon, Mr. Opendack inquired about the nature of the building to be erected. He was told it would be a three-car garage He was not told about the hobby shop above the garage. At the time when the constructIOn was started, he had no objectIOn to a three-car garage on the prenuses--in fact he considered thIS a welcome change, since defendant Sylvester Madding and his brother and SIster, who also live WIth him, own a total of three cars whIch had been parked m front of the Maddmg house most of the tIme, and smce the single-car garage was qmte old and would not accommodate a modern car. When the builder started the second level of construction on the garage, Mr. Opendack again mqmred, and was mformed about the hobby shop After checkmg the plans and the bmldmg permIt, Mr Opendack then checked with the CIty engmeer's office Thereafter, he mstltuted an actIOn agamsI Mr Sylvester Maddmg and the bmlder, Phillip H Darland, domg busmess as PaCIfic Home Remodelmg Company, to enJolD the constructIOn of the hobby shop He also mc1uded Page :2 the CIty of Seattle as a defendant, but the CIty was later dismIssed from the smt at the motIOn of appellants The complamt asked for a temporary mjunctlOn to stop the constructIOn and a permanent mjunctlOn to prevent the constructIOn of tIllS addItIOnal level of the buildmg wruch was to be the hobby shop By the tm1e appellants' motIOn for a temporary injunctlOn could be brought on for heanng, on January 16, 1964, SlX days after It was filed, the extenor shall of the buildmg was nearly completed The upper level frammg was fimshed and the rafters of the roof were mstalled The roof was not yet 'sheeted' WIth wood, but the extenor wall 'sheeting' was ill place. *174 After the heanng, at which testlll10ny by Mr. Darland, the bmlder, was received, and photographs taken by Mr Opendack's family were admItted in evidence, and counsel for both SIdes had argued, the tnal court granted the temporary mjunctlon Due to a mIsunderstanding between defendants' counsel and the court, Mr Darland understood that he would be penmtted to finish the TOof in order to protect the buildmg from damage by ram. By the tIme the mlsunderstandmg was cleared up, the sheetmg had been placed on the roof, but the tar surface had not been applied There bemg no statements ill the record to the contrary, we assume that the upper level of the building at the present time remams at thIS stage of completIOn For purposes of this smt, the significance ofthis sltuatlOn is that the buildmg has reached ItS full height Under the provisions of the ordinance quoted above, the buildmg must comply with two reqUlrements. First, It must be only one 'story' Second, it must not be more than 12 feet in heIght A trial on the merits as to the Issuance of the permanent mjunction was held on October 15, 1964, before a dIfferent Judge from the one who held the original heanng on the temporary mjunctIOn At tIns trial, the trIal court (slttmg WIthout a jury), after heanng additIOnal eVIdence, detennmed that the building compl1ed WIth the zomng code. It later made findmgs offact and conclusions of law and rendered Judgment dIsmIssing the complamt WIth prejudIce, and dlssolvmg the temporary lDJunctlOn Appellants have assigned four errors The first assignment of error reads 1 Conc1uslOns of Law II and IV are not supported by the Fmdmgs of Fact Copr. @ 2004 West. No Claim to Ong. U.S. Govt Works VJestlav\~ 417P.2d849 69 Wash 2d 171,417 P.2d 849 (Cite as: 69 Wash.2d 171,417 P.2d 849) **852 These conclUSlOns read II That smd structure does not constitute a vlOlatlOn of the Zonmg Ordmance ofthe Cny of Seattle IV That the bUlldmg (permit) as Issued by the CITy *175 of Seattle on December 26, 1963, was Issued m accordance WIth the Zonmg Ordmances of the CIty of Seattle. ASSIgnment of error No 2. reads . Fmdmg of Fact X IS not supported by the eVidence It reads 'That the lower compartment of said structure, accordmg to the plans as admitted m evidence herein, falls under the defimtlOn of 'cellar' as set forth in said ordinance, and wlthm the 12 feet heIght hmlt of the zomng code.' The quesTIon here IS assuming said buildmg IS a one story buildmg, is the buildmg within the twelve (12) feet heIght limit of the code? [1] First, with regard to aSSIgnment of error No.1, it is ObVlOUS that fmdmg of fact No. 10, on the mltlal readmg, does not make a finding as to the height of the buildmg from 'lot grade,' or, as one 'witness phrased It, the 'average fmished grade' of the buildmg The finding makes reference only to the 'cellar' Therefore, assignment of error No 1 has merit. [2] Second, the builder and the witness from the city engmeering office testified as to the proper method of measurmg height under the ordmance, but then read the plans WIDch measure the heIght of the buildmg on only the Side walls on each SIde ofthe buildmg mstead of averaging the grade levels measured at the center of each of the four walls, as required by the ordmance The only testimony of the WItness from the engineenng office whIch referred to the averagmg of the grades of the four walls pertamed to the deterrnmatlOn of whether or not the lower level on which the garage was located was a cellar or a basement. [3] Furthennore, there IS no mdlcation in the record that the definitlOn of the 'heIght of bUIlding' as defined m 26 06.090 was followed m order to determine properly the pomt on the buildl11g from WhICh the dIstance to the average fimshed grade was to be measured to determine the height of the buildmg (See ordinance qnoted above) It appears to us that this requires merely a mathematical computatlOn of no +176 great difficulty, if the proper evidence IS available The trIal court's oral opmlOn states that the eVIdence appears to show that the bmlding IS withm the 12-foot height lmlitatlOn (even though finding of fact No 10 does not so find) TIns may be true, but thIS factual matter does not mvolve the weighmg of confhctmg testImony concerning measurements or a disputed mterpretatlOn of plans. All that is required IS to Page 3 follow the formula for detennmmg the heIght of a bmldmg as set out m the zomng code. Fmdmg of fact No 10 IS not based on that fornmla. [4] Because of thIS error on the part of the trIal court, we cannot deCide the question raIsed by appellants' assIgrmtent of error No 2, that findmg of fact No 10 IS not supported by the eVIdence. Consequently, we must vacate the Judgment and remand the case to the tnal court because of the madequacy of matenal findmgs of fact. See Bowman v. Webster, 42 Wash.2d 129,253 P.2d 934 (1953), Gnash v. Saan, 44 Wash 2d 412, 267 P.2d 674 (1954). The other assignments of error made by appellants need not be discussed, because It seems to us that they depend on our decislOn as to assigrmtent of error No.2. The judgment of the trial court is hereby vacated and the case remanded to the trIal court to make a proper finding of fact on the Issue of the heIght of the buildmg as defmed by the zonmg code and judgment consistent therewith. This may be done on the present record, or, if the trIal court deems It adVIsable, the court **853 may take such addItlOnal eVIdence material to this Issue as it feels 15 appropnate Any aggrieved party may appeal from the judgment. Costs will abIde the final disposition of the case, as permItted by Rule on Appeal 55(b) (1) It IS so ordered ROSELLINI, C J., and FI1\1LEY, V\7EA VER and HAMJLTON, JI., concur. 69 Wash.2d 171,417 P.2d 849 END OF DOCUMENT Copr @2004 West. No ClaIm to Orig. U S. Govt. Works. ELEC~AL PERMIT APPLICATION . FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Dall~/RC'I;: Pennil': DaltApprl>vcd; D;IlC!SJ;ucll: l"'l-~ -'- The Electrical Permit Application must be filled out comoletelv. Please type or reprint in ink- II you have any questions, please call (360. 417-4735 fh"P. # \oe> E L1U!... Fax number: (360)417-4711 /.'/ t 70' ~ o~ S- o L . (lc / Ja..C?u.e./II1t. 111/r1.i1'.f1-PhoneSt,s-.rOlr Fax: $... It\ <.. W s U. sf Owner or Elec. Contractor Agent: Property Owner: Phone: Address: City: ('"rt IUI,kJ License #: Exp: ZiP'! 'iT 3 It' 3 Electrical Contractor: Phone: Address: INSTALLATION WIRED BY: ~ OWNER Credit Card Holder Name: City: o ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR Zip: Billing Address: CIty: Zip: Credit Card Number: Exp. Date: VISA:_MC:- PROJECT ADDRESS: .>"f. WI e.... TYPE OF WCtRK: Check all that apply: ~New o Alteration/Addition '/J Residental o Multi-family o Remote Meter 'DDetached garage o Commercial 0 Mobile Home Sq. Ft. o Hot Tub 0 Swim Pool 0 Septic Pump o Low Voltage 0 Telecom. , 0 Sign Number of Circuits added or altered: i~.~ ~,If~~_( ~ ~.~M1U-AT DESCRIPTION 'OF THE ELECTRICAL PROJECT: eNL-'j ) Electrical Heat Load Additions fCff.80 L.{tJl) A-;> ~~~mation o Baseboard o Furnace o Heat Pump o Fan-Wall _KW _KW _KW _KW o Overhead Service o Temp Service o Underground Service Voltage: :z..</o/ ~ Phase: ~- 3 Service Size: ~ 00 A Feeder Size: PAMC 14.05.060(B): For industrial, commercial, & residential projects larger than a duplex, a one -line drawing of the Electrical Service & Feeders, building size (sq. It.), load calculations. and the type & of conductors and/or raceway is required and shali accompany the Electricai Permit application. I herebycElrtify that I have read and examined this application and know that same to be true and correct, and I am authorized to apply tor this permit. I understand it is not the City's legal responsibility to determine what permits are require'd; it remains the applicants responsibility to determine what permits are required and to obtain such, Credit Card Holder's Signature: ~ 9~~l~ p~. QrZ... Date: Date: t '/1 j".3 Owner or Elec. Cant.. Signature: PW-9019 tit- (: ~ t/I/~3 ~~ ~~~ ~'7