1993, 02-01 Requirements Ltr to Attorneywcva
DEPARTMENT OF BUILDINGS
JAMES.L. MANSOt:. C.B.O., DIRECTOR
•
A DIVISION OF THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
DENIMS M. SCOTT. P.E., DIRECTOR
February I, 1993
W. Russell Van Camp
Van Camp & Bennion
1707 West Broadway Avenue
Spokane, Washington 99201
RE: Smith — 3514 North Edgerton
As discussed at our meeting on January 29, 1993, Spokane County is agreeable to withdraw
of its current complaint against your client if the following items are satisfied:
In order to properly identify areas of concerns "A" is attached.
Item 1
Item 2:
Items 3&4:
-:Item 5:
(2 story addition) — This addition, approximately 9' x 50' mor or less
located at the east property line, needs to be removed. Please advised
that Mr. Smith has had ample opportunity to seek resolvement Of set back
requirements and property line locations over the past several years. . If these
issues had been resolved favorably and the addition brought into building code
compliance, than removal would not be necessary. Apparently Mr. Smith
found that this option would not be feasible nor attainable and accordingly
removal is .necessary.
(Residence Addition) — This construction work was described b' Mr. Smith
in building permit application #12473. Since this addition was constructed
prior to the -issuance of the Building Permit, no inspections by the Building
Department :have .occurred. To close out the permit, the Dep
Buildings ,would .1) accept a letter from an .Engineer or •Archite
the State. of,;;Washington; • certifying that the .addition generally : c
applicable building codes and is structurally sound and safe . .to..
need to conduct -a safety : inspection relative to su
egress windows;•- smoke detectors, fire separation
would need "to be promptly brought into complian
ent -of
t, :-license by
nforms xo. '
upy:and .2) •
ch items asstaFs;.;•handrails,.
walls, etc.: Any .deficiencies
ce.
(Remodeled living area and extended roof cover) — The department would
accept a certified statement from an Engineer or Architect mentioned in
Item 2 addressing the structural adequacy and completion of an) modifications
required for certification.
(Garage) — By removing the eave overhang extending over the south property I
line and by modifying the southerly exterior wall to conform to the ...
construction standards for a one —hour fire rated wall, the garage would be
acceptable.
F B
CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION
WEST 13o3 BROADWAY • SPOKANE. WASHINGTON 99260-0550 • (500) 4-`_+67$ : •
FAX (500) 456-47C2
.f'-:
i3B3
Please note that in previous correspondence, mention was made of a
deficiently, in side yard building setback on the south line of your property.
Recent re —inspection of your property reveals that the structure involved at
this location is a garage. Even though it is attached to a dwelling, this
garage is considered to be an accessory building. At this place on your lot,
no side yard setback was required for an accessory building at the time this
structure was built. Accordingly, no requirement for such a side yard setback
is imposed.
If the above stated requirements are completed, the Department of Buildings and the Planning
Department would recommend to the Prosecuting Attorney's Office that the current charges of
co& .violations .identified -in the Affidavits be dropped.
Sincerely/
Sincerely,
tl
Allan deLaubenfels
Planner, Zoning Enforcement
Thomas L. Davis
Code Compliance Coordinator
c:..Stan Waltz, Prosecuting Attorney's Office
Attachment
-7/
S CA. c71U. ✓�
eock
/(eiczy/3
c 1,
/ S..
4-5
i c
o/t
a_ca //1 Sp67614-1