The URL can be used to link to this page

1111 DALEY PL.PDF11111111111111 10705 1111 DALEY PL ,F5Z-1-0 ADDRESS: TAX ACCOUNT/PARCEL NUMBER: n_-7 :j `i'q 'DQ0D0 % 0 o BUILDING PERMIT (NEW COVENANTS (RECORDED CRITICAL AREAS%" `1 '✓ J I DETERMINATION: Conditional Waiver ❑ Study Required ❑ Waiver DISCRETIONARY PERMIT #'S: _L7lJu • QyJ d , G(,(• • C(D , (,� • �n •q CU • j e{ • q 3 DRAINAGE PLAN DATED: I 0 p PARKING AGREEMENTS DATED: EASEMENTS) RECORDED FOR: A c 5-5 A 1 If sA-L-iWj�/Q,1mem1: j ��l� . e. A-r..51 '% ?? b�Z� bq I ' PERMITS (OTHER): PLANNING DATA CHECKLIST DATED:rtg SCALED PLOT PLAN DATED: SEWER LID FEE $: LID SHORT PLAT FILE:fi`/� S LOT:77� BLOCK: SIDE SEWER AS BUILT DATED: . �d (q I '1 � SIDE SEWER PERMIT(S) #: GEOTECH REPORT DATED: I! IN l Cl 7r , �e I 1 5 i a Z STREET USE / ENCROACHMENT PERMIT #: WATER METER TAP CARD DATED: .SF--E IbLoA ,01V T/LLLGl"o L:\TEMP\DSTs\Forms\Street File Checklist.doc District Pd Citjof Edmonds — Water. Depaiment : TAP CARD Reading: Dap Date �. No. No.' Meter Size 3/41/ Tap Size Mfgrs. No. 3S2,6 ea Style Purchaser:-14uLc,(� Serv. Add: _I I I I � �.0 l G. sZ, Lot'No. Blk. No. Ada. Residential Other: 57 E" 1 Mete Location GI f Tr N/E Service. Material: i i Remarks: =t�° 7- r �7- e� OUTGOING Index Reg. Route Bk. Stencil Card INCOMING Index Reg. Route Bk. Stencil Card S.. _J ROUTING SLIP NEW SERVICE INSTA1LLATION 1 l 1 ADDRESS: DATE: DIAL A DIG �7 P.U,D. TELEPHONE CABLE T.V. i GAS FOREMAN STORM SEWER. . LHER i FUTURE SERVICE INSTL: YES NO i BORE: CUT: LOCK DATE: INITIAL: CREW UNLOCK DATE: % / % ' d' INITIAL s• ACCOUNT NUMBER: 1 ,9 'Y'j 2- METER SHOP SUPPLIER: TREATMENT PLANT FOREMAN O B L T FOREMAN INITIAL: c� ;.}''" DATE: TAP CARD METER SHEET APPLICATION / UTILITY DISPATCH BILLING 7/76 �.,/+%.-',;--ct,�Y ��v-, �;. r„ ., o, � ��.S.A,,,.{,.,,>�.�'t..,'� R�+.�'°�'`�"'�'�t9�'�k't•�c-•titGwN-i�+'`` r� r.i}: �� : t .r. RECEIVED CITY OF EDMOND:01 8 1994 . /8907olzl PUBLIC WORKS. DEPT r.. Address of Construction: �/�.�IGF_�� iAcE SIDE SEWER PERMIT PERMIT NO_ 8573 Property Legal Description. (Include all easements): TREATIMENT PLANT Owner and/or(Coon`tractor, iyrtt% GC %r2u�?ld State License No. in 799 Building Permit No. G3"Single Family t;❑ Multi -Family (No. of Units ) t ❑ Commercial ❑ Public Irwasion into City Right -of -Way: ErNo ❑ Yes RW Construction Permit No. Cross other Private Property: CT"No ❑ Yes Attach legal description and copy of recorded easement I certify that I have read and shall comply with all city requirements as indicated on the back of the Permit Card. Date * CALL DIAL -A -DIG (1-800-424-5555) BEFORE;ANY EXCAVATION . OFFICE USE ONLY * FOR INSPECTION CALLA 3 Permit Fee: 771 Trunk Charge: Assessment Fee: . Lid No.: Partial Inspection: Comments =a PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. -0220 Issued By Date Issued: y /1/1— �y Receipt No.: Date Initial Reason Rejected: Date Final Inspection Approved: Dat - nitiae 0-�— - R . Initial ** PERMIT MUST BE POSTED ON JOB SITE ** White Copy: File Green Copy: Inspector Buff Copy: Applicant Revised 3/90 Ili ... M c A E LU u 0 F P4 w 101.9, z O u A H 0 u W z z O u d H O u O z u O a oa 0 F 0 0 I� u A a u w a. yY v� 0 J-2, uv l v 2 W M N O O a 0 Critical Areas Checklist Site Information Project Name: LOT % N AtZBp2 14tLLS Permit Number. Site Location: i I I I - DAtLtY PLACE Property Tax Account Number. 11+9-ooy- do7-000+ Approximate- Site Size (acres or square feet): i% o3 4 SQ 1~r Have you filled out a Critical Areas Checklist for a project on this site before? NO General Site Conditions 1. Has the site been cleared or. logged? YES Date of most recent action: AeMni,_17 8`1 Soils / Topography' _ 2. In the Snohomish County Soil Survey, what is the mapped soil type(s)? 5EE , ATracj.kw Rg,-2i 3. Describe the general site topography. Check all that apply. Flat: less than 5 feet elevation change over entire site. . Rolling. slopes on site generally less than 15% (a vertical rise of 10 feet over a horizontal distance of 66 feet.) Hilly: slopes present on site of more than 15% and less than 30% ( a vertical rise of 10 feet of horizontal distance.) ✓ Steep: grades of greater than 30% present on site. Comments Hyd rology/Vegetation 4. Site contains areas of year-round standing water: No 5. Site contains areas of seasonal standing water. ILO Approx. Depth: w/A 6. Site is in the floodway No floodplain NO of a water course. 7. Site contains .a creek or an area where water flows across the grounds surface? )ILS flows are year-round? Y'C S Flows are seasonal? NO 8. Site is primarily: forested ;meadow ; shrubs . ✓ ; mixed 9. Obvious wetland is present on site: Mc) 10. Wetland inventory or map indicates wetland present on site: 3M Yc=s 11. Critical Areas inventory or map indicates any Critical Area on site: YEs -M owpM-r- oPM R.t-OD For. Oty Use Only ega -tqy- City of Edmonds Critical Areas Checklist The Critical Areas Checklist contained on this form is to be filled out by any person preparing a Development Permit Application for the City of Edmonds prior to his/her submittal of a development.permit to the City. The purpose of the Checklist is to enable City staff to determine whether any potential Critical Areas are or may be present on the subject property. The information needed to complete the Checklist should be easily available from observations of the site or data available at City Hall (Critical Areas inventories, maps, or soil surveys). RECEIVED D JAN 0 4 1992 PERMIT COUNTER An applicant, or his/her representative, must fill out the checklist, sign and date it, and submit it to the City. The City will review the checklist, make a precursory site visit, and make a determination of the subsequent steps necessary to complete a development permit application. With a signed copy of this form, the applicant should also submit a vicinity map of the parcel with enough detail that City staff can find and identify tie subject parcel(s). In addition, the applicant is encouraged to include any other pertinent information or studies in conjunction with this Checklist to assist staff in completing their preliminary assessment of the site. I have completed the attached Critical Area Checklist and attest that the answers provided are factual, to the best of my knowledge (fill out the appropriate column below). Owner / Applicant: Name Title Street Address City, State, ZIP Phone Signature Date Applicant Representative: 1?oi3 ar - PLkG,gs—vS Name A(4tito( 7.4-='0 AGt:wr oP CTiiIl�IV1�V �6..-7l�WV fT��r•�� \�J Title 9.0 Box S3(& Street Address LYA)1J w 0 0 p WA I004(o AT17S-74;f City, State, ZIP Phone Si afore Date From • N 24. © 7Ea.1e FI1 Ji STREET FILE � QEOSCIENCE31NC. Post Office Box 6966 Bellevue, WA 98008-0966 Telephone (206)391.8255 Focslmlle (206)391-8270 Kevin Hanchett Job Number 160 c/o Homestyle Construction November 19, 1992 221 Jailles Street, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 Attention: Marl; McNaughton Subject: Geoteclmical Study and Professiona! Opinion Application of Meadowdole Criteria Lot 7, Harbor Hills Subdivision Edmonds, Washington Reference: 1) Prelinihiaty Geoteelvvcal Fngineering Report T.ot 7, Harbor Hill Subdivision EdIt'1oIlds, Washington by DODDS Geosciences Lie, dated June 15, 1992 2) Harbor Hills Edmonds, Washington Cert. No. 8411-15G Geotecluucal Engineering Repoli by Cascade Testing Laboratory, Inc. dated December 5, 1984 3) Harbor Hills, Phase 11 Edmonds, Washington Job No. 8411-150 Geotecliniml Engineeruig Report by Cnscade Geotecinilcal RECEIVED dater] May 23, 1.989 NOV 23 1992 4) Lot 7 of harbor Hills Subdivision Edmonds, Washwigton 5 DA, INC. Job No. 9002-050 Geotecluiical Cngmeeringg Repoli by Cascade Gcotecluucal, Lie. 9 0- 9 5 2 dated May 8,1990 Gentlemen. Edmonds City Ordinance #2661 and the Earth Community Development Code Chapter 19.05, herein referred to as the "Meadowdole Critertn", were generally enacted to lmrovide guidelines In From No 24.2022 03:18 P11 P03 LOT 7, HARBOR HILLS November 19, 1992 Job Number 160 . Page 2 the engineering and development of the Meadowdale Landslide Area. This landslide area is located in the northen, portion of Edmonds, and is a lar c, geologically distinct zone with a well documented history of landslides, subsidence, erosion hazards, and washouts. The criteria for development in the Meadowdale Area is necessarily thorough and stringent, tequititip expensive testing, complete analyses of worst -case conditions, and document.9tion of owner understandings and consultant opinions and responsibilities. It is my opinion that the Meadowdale Criteria is completely appropriate and generally applicable to larger areas/neighborhoods with a distinct history of landslide problems and/or the potential for bistHbility problems. Theapp2cation of the criteria, when a ltk4tory of landslidinm g probles has been documented, provides some protection for both the owner and tine surrounding neighborhood. However, that is not the case with Lot 7 of the Harbor Hills Subdivision. We are not aware of Finy history of landslide, subsidence, or erosion problems on this lot. lie lot has a generally trdld to moderate slope, with native soil subsurface conditions (ground and water) apparently similar to that of the adjacent older neighborhood which was constructed in the past without the stringent Meadowdale Criteria being applied. 11iis older neiglborhood appears to have generally withstood the test of time. In order to more fully investigate the subsurface conditions of Lot 7, three additional test pits were excavated on the property on August 13, 1992, or,, the uphill side of the proposed residence. The purpose of tic pits was to detern&e the depth of loose soft material and the deir`Gity of the underlying native soil. The logs of these test pits are attached to this letter. The test pits generally confirmed that the uphill side of tl.e proposed building location is underlain by between 4.5 and 9.0 feet of loose, soft., variable fill soils. Under the fill soils is a medium -dense to dense competent gravelly silty sand. Although groundwater seepage was not noted during excavation, it is our opinion that abundant groundwater seepage. should be anticipated between the fill/native soil interface during the wetter winter mondis. Aftar reviewing the referenced reports and applying the results of our recent fieldwork, it is our opinion that the Meadowdale Criteria should not be applied to Lot 7 of the Harbor Hills Subdivision, as it is not appropriate. Atralyzing massive hypothetical earthquakes and examining numerous compouncled worst -case scenarios is not a reasonable requirement to design the foundation support its the observed soils do not indicate Mendowdale-type subsurface conditions. The City of almonds should still require competent engineering Find design of the proposed home, and quality constniction practices during the buildvtg of the home, in accordance with normal standards and conditions. RECEIV ED NOV 23 1992 SDA, INC. LOT 7, HARBOR HILLS November 19, 1992 Job Number 160 Page 3 If there are any qucstiows conoeriOng Us letter, please contact me directly at 391-8255. Sincerely: DODD sciences Inc, 0 t XPMES Mark K. Dodds, P.E. MY, n/wd enclostnts: 3 Test Pit Logs. RFCEIVF-L' -,Nov 231992 soAt MC. 9io_952 W DODDS GEOSCIENCES, INC. J a 1, 1 h± z RECEIVEa NpV 231992 C Sot QLocation of Test Pit Ex-zavDtion NORTH � ti0 f J f N 1 Cy f � 49 ' I TP z /1 � •. � 1 '1'• QCO 40 C i T�'3 �o •Oa• f` Job Number 160 - Plate I Test Pit Location Plnn Lot 7 - HEirbor Hills Subdivision Edmonds, Wnshington FrFr•om r v G4. eudd 10.3611Z r-" rr LO r 4 �S 55 � 8 7 � 5 �S 9 Sm to o w c $ d a h N 1 fill 2 3 4 Sm 5 TEST PIT 1 DATE EXCAVATED: 8/13/02 EXCAVATION METHOD:Backhoe DESCRIPTION LOGGED BY: Mark Dodds, P.E. SURFACE ELEVATION: 214.5 ft. MSL Ekown Gravely Sllty Sandy Diu will-, wood• concrete, pl&lslic. brown rotting woof with bgS, and grass. Gray Grevelly Slty Sand, most, fi nsi:. Stopped at 9.5 feCt. Nc GNI AT[. TEST PIT 2 N DATE EXCAVATED: 8/13/A2, Ul ~• EXCAVATION METHOD: Backhoe LOGGED BY: Mark Dodds, P.E. N DESCRIPTION SURFACE ELEVATION: 218.0It. 5�S Brown Gravel'y Silly Sandy Fill• m"Ist, loose. S�4 SAS Eirowri to gray Gravelly 5rlty Sand, uwi$t, 101'dium-4ensc. •o• 6 Stopped at G.g feet. No GwT W.RECEIVED NOV 23 1992 e SDA, INC. 9 cDP►• 1NG• DODDS Geosciences Inn LOG OF TEST PITS 1 AND 2 TEST PIT P.O. Box 6966 �� Lot 7, Harbor Hills REPORT Bellevue, Nasnington Edmonds; WA R Tele: (206) 391-8255 cpA. INC. TREET FILE. ' CEOSCIENCES NC. BUILDING post Office Box 6966 FEB 2 6 1992 Bollevue, WA 98=-0966 Telephone/FAX (206)391-8255 Kevin Hanchctt c/o Homestyle Construction 221 James Street, Suite 100 Edmonds, WA 98020 Attention: Mark McNaughton Subject: Lot 7 Ha�oGeotechnical Hill S bdivEngineering'Report ision Edmonds, Washington Reference: 1) Edmonds, Washington Cert. No. 8411-15G Geotechnical E.jigiiiccr'u�b Report by Cascade Testing Laboratory, Inc. dated December S, 1984 2) Harbor Hills, Phase U Edmonds, Washington Job No. 8411-15G Geotechnical Engineering Report by Cascade Geotechnical dated May 23, 1989 3) Lot 7 of Harbor Hills Subdivision Edmonds, Washington. Job No. 9002-OSG Geotechnical Engineering Report by Cascade Geotechnical, Inc. dated May 8,1990 4) Undated Unsigned Site Plan showing topography and residence placement of unknown origin received by SDA, Inc. on May 21, 1992 • RECEIVED 5) Five Sheets of Undated Unsigned Construction Plans showing both plan and side views of unknown origin JUN 151992 SDA, INC. Job Number 160 June 15,1992 Gentlemen: We are pleased to present this preliminary geotechnical engineering report for Lot 7 of the Harbor Hill Subdivision in Edmonds, Washington. This report is based visit with Robert n our review hes of of the referenced materials above and our observations during a siteStructural Design Associates on June 8, 1992. No warranty is expressed or impliod. Plate 1 presents the guidelines in the use and Application of this report. 91-002 QO.952 LOT 7 HARBOR HILL,BDIVISION June 15, 1992 M: AIPTI•1 - � ` Job Nuinber 1 t50 . Page 2 Lot 7 consists of a west -facing lot northwest of the cut-de-cao at the end of Daley Place in Edmonds, Washington. The lot is irregularly shaped, with moderate slopes of about twenty-five to thirty-five percent. The lot has been generally cleared of trees and shrubs. Fill soils from the excavation in Lot 6 had been dwnped on the eastern (uphill) side of the lot, however, we understand these fill soils have subsequently been removed. Subsurface Description Test pits have been excavated on Lot 7 previously by Cascade Geoteewcal.. Plate 2, Site Plan, shows the approximate location of the test pits. Plates 3 presents the text of the test pit logs. Although there may very well be subsurface variations between the test pits, and conditions not readily apparent from the surface, we expect the following subsurface interpretation to be essentially correct: The eastern portion of the proposed building area is immediately underlain by up to eight feet of variable sandy fill soils. Below the fill soils is approximately two feet of peat with sandy interlayers. The western portion of the site is not covered with the fill blanket, but instead has a surficial layer of two feet of topsoil/peat. 'Below the loose, variable, compressible soils, a medium -dense sandy silt to silty sand was encountered. Groundwater seepage was not indicated on the test pit logs, but we would anticipate the peaty soils were very wet. Proposed Construction and Conceit Our understanding is that an oblong single-family residence will be constructed near the center of the lot. The long axis of the house will trend generally north/south. The structure will be three stories, with a plan view of about 25 feet by 83 feet. Cars will access the downstairs garage by an a driveway near the southern property line. The structure will. require cuts into the existing slope on the order of test to twelve feet. However, an additional approximately six feet of fill will be required immediately east of the residence to bring up the site grades to the intended elevation. It is not clear at this tithe whether high rockeries N feet) will. be required on the north and south sides of the home to allow for a smooth transition to finish grades. Our construction concept is as follows: 1) Install erosion control downslope of construction area. 2) Place fill soils on the slope mast of the proposed home to firdsh grades. This will allow access to the site by the drill rig. = 3) Install a reinforced augercast soldier pile wall immediately cast of the proposed -residence. �,OT 7, HARBOR HILL 3'FIBT�,tI�ISION Job 16fi be-r 160 June 1 S, 1992 Page 3 4) Excavate out soils in the building area to lower footing elevations. Periodically survey soldier piles during and after excavation activities to monitor pile performance and check for excessive movement of the piles and supported grouted. S) Install drainage as required by this office. As a minimum, footing drains will be required on all uphill sides of the stricture. In addition, subslab drains and/or additional cutoff trenches may be required. 6) Place footings and walls. Waterproofing of underground walls, including waterstops between the foundation and wall will. be required. Except for the top two feet, a drainage geotextile is also recommended for the full length of all underground walls. $ackfill between the foundation walls and soldier piles can consist of drain rock, pea gravel, or clean crushed rock. The top two feet of wall bacld'ill should consist of silt, clay, or topsoil. 7) Place rockeries and access road/driveway. Slope. Stability The stability of the slope on the site was investigated in accordance with the Meadowdale Criteria (City of Edmonds Ordinance #2661). This ordinance requires studying the present stability of the site, the stability during construction, and the stability after the proposed development is completed. The results of our computer analyses where hundreds of potential slip circles were studied are summarized on Plates 4, S, and 6. For these studies, the peaty layer was assumed to be fully saturated. Plate 4 shows the minimum Factors of Safety (FS) generated for existing conditions on the property. Plate 5 shows the miRimurn FS generated for slip circles where the slip plane extends below the soldier piles. Plate 6 is similar to Plate 5, except that the residence has now been constructed and an earthquake with a hnri7.nntn1 a,Pff.nieat of 0.5 and a vertical coefficient of 0.15 is occurring. Our study demonstrates to our satisfaction that the site will become more stable, and iArill remain stable after the development has been completed, even under conditions where a major earthquake is occurring and subsurface soils are saturated. Augercast Soldier Pile Wall After fill has been placed on the slope in accordance with the "Earthwork and Grading" section of this report, a cantilevered augercast soldier pile wall will need to be constructed east of the proposed residencejexcavation. The soldier piles will need to extend far enough on either side of the excavation to provide positive reinforcement to the upper soils above the excavation. Because of the possibility of caving into the chilled holes and the required depth of the soldier pIles, we reconunend the augercast piles be installed with continuous flight hollow -stem augers. This method involves drilling the hole with the auger equipment, and then continuously pur►tptzhg concrete through the center of the hollow -stem auger during auger extraction. Steel reinforcement consisting of elther a full -depth steel beam or reinforcement bar cage is then placed into the concrete -filled hole. _. LOT 7, HARBO,R HILL DDIVISION June 15, ,1992 Job 'j. Nu nber 160 Page 4 A head of concrete must be maintained above the auger tip to ensure an intact column of concrete has filled the drilled hole after the auger is removed. This can be achieved by withdrawing the auger slowly while maintaining a suitably high pump pressure. As a general rule, the rate of anger withdrawal should not exceed about ten feet per minute, and the pressure at the concrete groat pump should be in the range of 150 to 250 pounds per square inch (psi), depending upon the lengthof feeder hose. The pump should be equipped with a calibrated stroke counter so that concrete grout volumes may be calculated. The concrete surrounding the pile must have sufficient bond and strength to transfer the loads from the soil through the concrete into the steel section. Cantilevered soldier piles with a level backslope that will not be subjected to surcharge loading (i.e., construction equipment) should be designed to accommodate the pressures as shown on Plate 7. We recommend two -foot -diameter augercast piles placed no closer than three pile diameters, center to center, for the soldier pile wall. Temporary lagging may be required between pales if there is significant soil running or spalling from between the piles. Assuming a level backslope, we recommend soldier piles be designed to support active soil pressures equal to that of a fluid having a unit weight of fifty-five (55) pounds per cubic foot (pcf) to twelve feet below finish grades. Below this depth, active soil pressures can be reduced to thirty-five (35) pcf to the full depth of the pile, including the embedded length. Lateral movement of the soldier piles is resisted by passive soil pressures which begin talong affect at two feet below excavation grades. We reeoimnend utilizing a passive soil pressure o£ three hundred (300) pcf acting over two pile diameters for this project. The reqquired depth of embedment below excavation grades can be calculated by funding the point of zero shear, determining the length that will satisfy moment equilibrium about this point, and then adding twenty percent to that length to satisfy force equilibrium. The minimum depth of crabedmerit for cantilevered soldier piles on this project is the height of stickup above .excavation grades, or ten feet, whichever is greater. For example, a cantilevered soldier pile which supported eighteen feet of excavation, would, as a minimum, have to be thirty-six feet deep. The vertical capacity of soldier piles is dependent upon the frictional shaft resistance along the embedded portion"of the pile and the soil strength at the pile tip. For this project, we recommend utilizing a fractional shaft resistance value of 750 psf and a pile end bearing value of 6000 psf for that portion of die pile in the medium -dense to dense native sandy soils. As augercast piers cannot be inspected after installation (except by load testing), it is important that our firm be present during installation. This will allow us: 1) To confirm that the encountered subsurface conditions are consistent with those indicated by the subsurface exploration, 2) to evaluate whether wall construction activities comply with the intent of contract plans and specifications, and 3) to provide recommendations for design changes in the event unanticipated subsurface conditions are encountered. LOT 7, HARBOR NILLfUBDIVISION Jude 1 S, 1992 S - - Job Number 16 Page S The proposed new single -story structure may be supported on conventional continuous and spread footings bearing on the medium -dense to dense native sandy -soils or on compacted structural fill or crushed rock built up from medium -dense to dense competent native soils:, All foundations should bear at a minimum depth of twelve (1.2) inches below the adjacent outside finish grade. A bearing pressure of two thousand (2000) pounds per square foot (psf) may be assumed for foundations bearing as described above. The bearing pressure may be increased by one-third to accommodate short term wind and seismic loads. To provide protection against shear failure, we recommend continuous and spread footings have miiwnum widths of sixteen (16) inches and twenty-four (24) inches, respectively. We estimate that foundations bearing on dense silty sandy soils under the site will settle one-half inch. Estimated settlements for foundations bearing on structural fill or crushed rock are approximately one-half inch. Lateral loads such as wind and seismic forces which are not taken -up by the augercast piled wall are accormnodated by friction between the foundation elements and the bearing soils and/or by passive earth pressure against the foundations. However, passive earth pressure is only available if structural fill is used to bacldill against the foundation, or the foundation is poured against the existing soil. A coefficient of 0.40 may be used between the foundation elements and supporting soils. The passive resistance of undisturbed native soils and structural fill may be taken to be an equivalent fluid having the density of three hundred (300) pounds per cubic foot (pef). Reinforced slab -on -grade floors are anticipated for the lower level of the new structure. Slabs - on -grade may be supported on a minimum of six inches of free -draining sand or gravel placed above competent soils. Additional subslab drains consisting of slotted PVC pipe bedded in fabric -wrapped drain rock may be required. This will be decided in the field during construction. All loose soft zones must be repaired prior to placement of the subslab fill. A vapor barrier such as a sheet of a 6-mil plastic membrane must be placed beneath the slab. ra -ale Historically, there has been a significant amount of subsurface water moving through the site, and therefore subsurface drainage is of paramount importance to the proposed development. It is our opinion that the peat layer indicates the probable highest elevation of significant subsurfacc drainage. During construction, while • working in the excavation, site drainage can be accommodated through the judicious placement of shallow trenches to capture and channel flowing water to a suitable discharge facility. Sump pumps, if necessary to control the water, can also be installed at selected locations. LOTHARBOR HILL�U,B,DIVISION Job 0 7, RB Number 16 June .15, 1992 Page 6 We recommend final site drainage be accomplished through the installation of. 1) Footing drains around the uphill sides of the home. Footing drains should consist of four -inch -diameter slotted PVC pipe, bedded in a minimum of six inches of drain rock. The pipe invert should be lower than the adjacent floor slab, and be sloped to drain. The pipe should be covered with a min mum of one foot of drain rock. A nonwoven geotextile fabric should be. wrapped around the outside of the drain rock. We recon-mend using Mirafii 140N, Supac 4NP or another similar geotextile for this purpose. 2) The wall backfill between the residence foundation wall and the adjacent augercast wall should consist of pea gravel, drain rock, or clean crushed rock fill. The top two feet of wall backfill should consist of topsoil, silt, or clayey soils which are relatively imperneable. A layer of nonwoven geotextlle fabric should be used to separate the cal of relatively impermeable soils from the lower permeable soils. Ftcsidencc Well. &undation Foundation walls must be designed to support the lateral earth pressures which abutting soils will unpose. The following recommendations are equivalent fluid pressures which can be used for the high foundation (east) wall: Design Parameter Value Active Earth Pressure* 40 pcf Passive Earth Pressure 300 pcf Unit Weight of Soil 12.5 pcf Coefficient of Friction 0.40 *The active earth pressure recommended assumes the wall can deflect at least 0.002 times the wall height. if this assumption is incorrect, a uniform lateral pressure of one hundred psf should be added to the active earth pressure. For walls less than twelve feet high., the active earth pressure can be reduced to thirty (30) pcf. The values reconvnended above are ultimate values, and should be reduced by an appropriate safety factor. As a guideline, we recommend a minimum factor of safety of 1.5 for overturning and sliding. The resultant force from the soil (neglecting the passive pressure force) can be calculated by" taking moments about the toe of the wall. The resultant force should pass through the middle third of the footing. LOB' 7 HARBOR HILAUBDIil]Sl& job Number 160 .tune 15,1992 page 7 The above design values do not include hydrostatic pressures behind the walls and assume that no surcharge slopes or loads are placed above, or near the walls. Design values can also be. exceeded if heavy construction equipment is allowed within a prism defined by a 1:1 (H: V) line extending up to the soil surface from the back end of the foundation wall footing. If any of these conditions exist, then the above design values should be augmented by appropriate additional pressures. Excavations and Slop Temporary and permanent excavations and slopes for this project must meet all applicable government safety regulations. Temporary cuts to a depth of four feet may be attempted vertical. In general, excavation slopes greater than four feet in depth should be sloped to a maximum gradient of 1.5:1 (Honzontal:Vertical) for the top twelve feet. Below this depth a temporary slope of 1:1 (H:V) is adequate. These general recommendations may be modified during construction, depending upon observed site conditions. Permanent cut and fill slopes should not exceed 2:1 (H:V). To cut down on the effects of erosion, water should not be allowed to flow uncontrolled over the top of any slope. All pennanent slopes should also be seeded with appropriate vegetation. It is our understanding that rockeries are being considered for use on this site. A rockery is not able to function as an engineered structure and resist significant lateral earth pressures from the soil without excessive deformation or failure. Rockeries can retard the effects of erosion. We rccomumend rockeries be constructed of a m' ' num four-imu► IUA., tu►d be lbt ;.ICJ to (lie fullowirig heights: Maximum Height Soil Behind Rocker).- without Reinfomen1ent Loose Sandy Fill Soils 4 feet Competent Dense Native Sandy Soils 8 feet Drainage is required behind all rockeries, with the same requirements and general installation procedures as given above for retaining walls (e.g., bedded PVC pipe, drain rock, etc,). Rockeries must be constructed with care, hopefully by a contractor with proven experience in rockery construction. The individual rocks in the rockeries should be hard, durable, and sound, in accordance with accepted local practices. Provisions for maintenance, such as access to the - rockery, should be considered during design. LOT 7, HARBOR HILL S UBDI VISION June 15, 1992 Job Number 16 Page 8 We understand the site will be accessed by a driveway near the southern propert line. Concern has been raised about the stability of the existing road, and constraints on the placement of any additional fill in the access road area. We have not been provided with any plans on the proposed improvements to the access road. In general, it is possible to reinforce fill soils below roadways with geotextile fabrics and/or grids to achieve final fill slopes on the order of 1:6 (H:V), or greater. Alternately, concrete walls can. be built near property boundaries to provide positive support to fill soils below the roadway. In general, rockeries cannot be relied upon to support umeinforced fills below roadways. We can provide further consultation on this matter as required. General Earthwork and, , c ra 1 i11 The site is moderately vulnerable to erosion during construction activities. We recommend the first step in site development consist of the installation of a filter fabric`fence downslope of any eXcaYatlon activity. Depending upon the weather and amounts of site runoff, hay bales placed a certain key locations and /or surface trenching may also be required. Site construction begins by stripping and clearing the build ng areas of all existing topsoil, vegetation, and any other deleterious material. Stripped materials should be removed front the site. Fill would then be placed on the slope to finish grades above the home area. Fill soils placed on a slope, should be benched into that slope during the installation process. Fill soils on this site should be statically rolled with a smooth tired drum roller or a filled dump truck. Fill soils which will be restrained with the augercast soldier pile wall should be. compacted to a moderately dense, unyielding state, however, fill compaction percentages and moisture contents are generally not critical in this case. Fills that roust support loads while not being supported by the augercast pile wall are structural fills. Structural fill is defined as any fill placed below structures and pavements where the fill soils need to support loads without unacceptable deflections or shearing. Structural fill should be placed above unyielding site soils in maximum six -inch -thick loose lifts and statically rolled or compacted to 95 percent of Modified Proctor (ASTM D-1557). Much of the on -site soil has significant fine-grained material (silt), and is therefore moisture -sensitive. These soils will be difficult to place and compact as structural fill if these soils are wetter than the optimum moisture content at the erne of compaction. During wet weather or under wet conditions, structural fill should consist of a granular soil having less that five, percent silt or _clay (measured on that portion which passes the 3/4-inch sieve). LOT 7, HARBOR HILL SUBDIVISION Job Number 160 June 15,1992 Page 9 Groundwater has been noted in the peaty layers, and the contractor should anticipate and be prepared to accommodate moderate seepage an the excavation. We anticipate that groundwater seepage will generally occur between the loose to medium -dense surficial soils, and the underlying competent native sandy soils. Closure It is reeotmnended we be allowed to review the plans and specifications for this project to verify site specific subsurface requirements are met. It is also recommended that we be retained to provide professional geoteclu&al consultation, testing, and observation services during design and construction. This allows us to: 1) confuyn that design eonfom s to specific subsurface requirements; 2) confinn that subsurface conditions during construction are consistent with those indicated by this report; 3) evaluate whether earthwork and foundation construction activities confonn to the intent of the contract specifications and plans, and; 4) provide recommendations for design, changes in the event of changed conditions. While on the site during construction, we will not direct or supervise the contractor or the work, nor we will be responsible for maintaining or providing for on -site safety during construction activities. Also, we will not be responsible for dimensional measurements during construction. It has been a pleasure providing you with our professional services. If there are any questions, please call me directly at 799-2962. Sincerely: DODDS Geosciences Inc. wASfi, 0 •y • • �0 '• 22508 '�� •;Fcrsi-�A�°� �� SS�ONAL EXPIRES 4112114,V Mark K. Dodds, P.E. MKD/wd enclosures: 7 Plates DODDS GFOSCIENCES, INC. • Job Number 160 - Plate 7 Soldier Pile Design Pressures Proposed Single Family Residence Lot 7, Harbor Hills Subdivision Edmonds, Washington STREET KE �y off' EID) Mo� CITY OF EDMONDS 121 5TH AVENUE NORTH - EDMONDS,WA 98020 PHONE: (425) 771-0220 - FAX: (425) 771-0221 �pc. 189� *PERMIT MUST BE POSTED ON JOBSITE* STATUS: ISSUED ENG20080026 SIDE SEWER PERMIT (I -Single Family) Permit Number: ENG20080026 Expiration Date: 4/24/2008 Job Address: I I I I DALEY PL, EDMONDS CONTRACTORAPPLICANT KEVIN HANCHETT THE GORDON CO INC 18807 81 ST AVE W 9404 36TH AVE SE EDMONDS, WA 98026 EVERETT, WA 98208 LICENSE #: GORDOCIO71 CH EXP: 2/14/2009 Y N 1. DESCRIPTION ]REPAIR N IPROPOSETO REUSE LATERAL LIDNUMBER: CPJNDER PUMP N I PROPOSE TO REUSE SIDE SEWER REPAIR SIDE SEWER EkSEMENTINFOWMATION N PROJECT CROSSES OTHER PRIVATE PROPERTY N I VERIFICATION OF RECORDED EASEMENTS COMPLETE INDEMNITY.- The Applicant has signed an application which states he/she holds the City of Edmonds harmless from injuries, damages or claims of any kind or description whatsoever, foreseen or unforeseen, that may be made against the City of Edmonds or any ofits departments or employees, including but not limited to the defense ofany legal proceedings including defense costs and attorney fees by reason ofgranting this permit. CALL DIAL -A -DIG (1-800-424-5555) BEFORE ANY EXCAVATION CALL FOR INSPECTION (425) 771-0220 EXT. 1326 24 HOUR NOTICE REQUIRED FOR ALL INSPECTION REQ UESTS APPROVALAPPLICATION THIS APPLICATION IS NOTA PERNUTUNTIL SIGNED BY THE CITY ENGINEER OR HIS/HER DEPUTY: AND FEES ARE PAID, AND RECEIPT IS ACKNOWLEDGED IN SPACE PROVIDED. Printed: Thursday, January 24, 2008 RELEASED BY FILE COPY q INSPECTORCOPY APPLICANT COPY STATUS: ISSUED ENG2OO8OO26 • Refer to City of Edmonds Side Sewer Information handout for approved pipe materials, inspections and other requirements. • A 6" cleanout with 12" locking cast iron lamphole cover is required at the property line. • Maintain 10' separation between the sanitary side sewer and the water service line. INSPECTIONS • E-Sanitary Side Sewer Inspection PARTIAL INSPECTION DATE: INITIAL: PARTIAL INSPECTION DATE: INITIAL: FINAL INSPECTION APPROVED DATE: INITIAL: NOTES: NOTES: - 1 BUILDING = ( 1994 STREE , APR 06 1993 COVENANT --op NOTIFICATION AND INDEMNIFICATION/$OLD HARMLESS Cinder the review procedures established pursuant to the State Building Code, incorporating amendments promulgated by the city. Of Edmonds, and as a prerequisite to the ,issuance of a building' permit fox the avnstrluction of a residential structure and attendant .facilities, the undersigned OWNERS of property do herebycovenant-, enant•, stipulate p to and promise as follows: 1. Descri `-ic cf m Qr erg �• • .:.. �..i.. ...,venant a; notification, and, indemnifir_ation/hold harmless relates to - a tract of land at the street address of IM (insert �t street address), Edmonds, Snohomish. County, Washington and legally described as: LOT 7, u►AYZt3oMkM 4 utr.l_s �cco�c�l►.ta To . e+-Ai"s>_ltror- w t (� iZ�CetZ9 e, !N VOUnmf 401 or- tLA7'S �. P►�frEi 165 f �1� `'� r� L�S!bt= � Q FCOrL�S Dt` SN01 Y ^JC1.a Comm", W Ul lLl�Cpn41►4t- NiAI'+BFiA.._ $9% 0$ OB n .. Notification and Covenant of Notifi.eation. The above referenced site (hereinafter '�subjert site") lies within an area which has been identified by the city of Edmonds as having a Potential for earth subsidence 'or landslide hazard. The risks associated with development of the site have been evaluated by technical consultants and engineers engaged by the applicant as a' Part of the process to obtain a building permit for the subject site. The results of'the consultant's reports and evaluations of WSS52079A/0006.040-034 02/08/90BUILDING VOL. r PbuE F., 7 �! a FEB the risks .associated with development area contained in building permit file number (insert number) on file- with the City of Edmonds Building Department. Conditions, limitations, or prohibitions on development may have been imposed .in accordance With the recommendations of the consultants in the :course of Permit issuance. The may require ongoing maintenance .on the part of any - owner or lessee or may require modifications to the structures and earth stabilizati.oi� matters in order to address future or anticipated changes in soil or other site conditions_ The statement-s and conditions proposed by the OWNERS! 'geotechnical engineer geologist, architect and/or structural It . / engineer are hereby. incorporated by reference from the contents of. the file as fully as if herein set forth., Any future Purchaser, lessee, lender or, any other person acquiring or seeking to acquire an interest.in• the property is put-on notice of the existence of the content of. the file and the City urges review of its contents,_ The file may be reviewed during normal business, hours or copies obtained at.. the Planning Department, City of Edmonds, 505 Bell Street, Edmonds, Washington. 98020. - - 3. Indemnification and old -Harmless. The _undersigned OWNERS hereby waive any and all. liability. associated with. development, stating that they have. fully informed themselves of all risks associated with development of the property-_ and do" therefore waive and.., relinquish any .and all causes of action against the City of Edmonds,, its. officers, agents and employees 'WSS52079A/0006_040.034 WSS/klt 020a 90 -2' 9S09 `� .150070 voL..2789pAr�Eti721 arising from and out of such development. In addition, the OWNERS on behalf of themselves, their successors in interest, heirs and .assignees, do hereby promise to indemnify and hold harmless the City of Edmonds, its officers, agents and employees from any loss, claim, liability.or damage of any kind or nature to persons_or property either on or off the site resulting from or out of earth subsidence or landslide hazard, arising from or out of the issuance of any permits) authoriiing development of the site, or occurring or arising out of any false, misleading, or inaccurate information provided by the OWNERS, their employees, or professional consultants in the course of issuance of the building permit_ 4. nsurance Re irement.. In addition to any bonding which may be required during the course of development, the community Services Director -MM/has not (strike one) specifically required the maintenance of .an insurance policy for public liability coverage in -the amount -and for the time set forth below in -order to provide for the financial responsibilities established through the indemnification and hold harmless agreement above: NO PUBLIC LIABILITY IM URANCE REQUIRED [insert insurance requirements and time period, if any --if no insurance required, so state.] WSS52079A/0006.040.034 -3- wSS/ klt 02/08/90 9309150070 VOL.2789PAGE 2722 1 of notification "•'c Lana. Thi covenant and indemnification concerns /hold the harmless touches and subject tract and shall run with the land, obligating and/or inuring to the benefit of binding, successors and ure owners. heirs, . interests or any other person or entity acquiring an interest in property, as their interest provision shall not be may appear. This as to require a mortgagor lender to � 9 goy or indemnify the City except to the extent of the' nor to obliga_t,e`_",,1, �r loss required. DONE this: day of rn I 1993_ OWNER (S) BY = STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF I certify that x SOW have satisfactory evidence that /5�+�+2�ff, m Signed this instrument and acknowledged' WSS52079A/0006.040.034 WSS/klt 02/08/90 50070 -4- vol. 2 7 (89 PAGE ti 7 2 3 it to be (h' he free and voluntary act mentioned in this instrument._ DATED this day of 199� for the purposes •, �mm�.ss one expires: STATE OF WASHINGTON .` COUNTY OF )Ss' I certify - thaw=----k�row or- -hav thatF ✓J ,C�i9n��Li-P` it - Signed this instrument and acknowledged to be is/ er) free and voluntary act for the mentioned in this instrPurposes .�� ument. DATED this day of 1995 STATE *'�Y"fkfll STATE OF WASHINGTON NOTAR'f Fo ej commission. •.Pires22296 COUNTY OF )S5: Y Certify that I know or have that N expires: 2^ — X satisfactory evidence signed this instrument, on oath stated that (he/she) was authorized to execute .the instrument and acknowledged it as the of (title) (name of party on behalf of whom instrument was executed)- to be the free and voluntary act of such part fa the uses and PurposeY r s mentioned in this instrument_ DATED this day of . ~ NOTARY PU$LIC MY commission expires: WSS52079A/0006.040.034 WSS/klt '. 02/08/90 -5- 15 0 p 70 • SOREET FILE CITY OF EDMOND r" S LAURA M. HALL 250 - 5TH AVE. N. • .EDMONDS, WA 98020 (206) 771-0220 FAX (206) 771-0221 MAYOR COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT l p. Public. Works • Planning . Parks and Recreation • Engineering 8g09 BUILDING MAR 0 5 1992 March 3, 1993 Robert J. Hughes 5630 - 198th St.. S.W. P. 0. Box 5366 Lynnwood; WA 98046-5366 Re: Engineering requirements for 1111 Daley P1., Hanchett SFR Dear Mr.,Hughes, During..the review of the. engineering drawings for the.subject single family residence, some concerns arose that need to be resolved before we can complete the engineering review: 1) What improvements will, be done to the access road and has Dodd's GeoScience reviewed the improvements to answer their concerns about the stability of the existing road/walkway (their letter dated June 15, 1992)? 2) What impact will driveway have on remaining driveway for Lot 8? 3) No details have been provided on the retaining -wall along the driveway. 4) Eighteen inch yard drain on the driveway, and cleanout should be placed within Mr. Hanchett's property. 5) 'All roof drains must go into storm detention system. 6) On -site detention system will be required if all roof drains cannot drain to existing plat detention system. 7) Footing and trench drains cannot be connected to the detention system. They can be connected to the outflow side of the pipe. Incorporated August 11, 1890 •� Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan Robert J. Hughes March 3, 1993 Page 2 In addition, we need a copy of the ingress/egress easement for Lot 7 to use Lot 8's driveway for access. With the construction of the driveway on Lot 8, it will be necessary to install the water service to Lot 8. If you have any questions, please call me at.771-0220, extension 324. Sincerely, ADDISON L. CHRISMAN IV Engineering Inspector J ALC/sdt c: Craig Campbell,.Lovell-Sauerland Sharon Nolan, Permit Coordinator. HANCHETT.SFR/TXTST530 =. - O i "t"Y C L E CIVIC CENTER � WONDS, WA 98020 STREET �� C(OP17 0006.150.052 93 045.1 08/25/899 100 r WSS/klt COVENANT ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT WHEREAS, the undersigned owner of property has been granted a conditional use permit by the City of Edmonds to maintain an accessory dwelling unit on the hereinafter described residential realty, and WHEREAS, such approval is subject to certain conditions and will automatically expire in the event that such conditions are no longer met, and WHEREAS, among those conditions is, the provision that the permit is personal to the applicant and will expire, in the event that the primary residence and accessory dwellingunit are I rented, leased, sold or otherwise conveyed to a person other than the applicant and undersigned owner, NOW, THEREFORE, _Kt-VIN ��4aN�t�t� i� 4 \_LIsvy,A(S + 14QATA(hereinafter "Owner(s)") does hereby covenant, stipulate and promise as herein set forth: 1. Touch and Concern the Land. This covenant touches and concerns a tract of residential real property (hereinafter "site" ) with a street address of 1111 D At,r=�-J Pl. A C tL Edmonds, Washington, and legally described on the attached Exhibit A, incorporated by this reference as fully as if herein set forth. 2. Existence and Expiration of Accessory Dwelling Unit Approval. On the application of the Owner(s), the City of Edmonds has approved a conditional use permit to install an accessory dwelling unit at the subject tract described in ATTACHMENT 11 WSS51667A -1- FILE NO. CU-93-19 closing such sale or conveyance, the premises shall be restored to its original. condition by removal of any kitchen facilities other than the primary kitchen installed for the use of the primary residence. DONE this lg_ day of I%'rmzL- 19,11. OWNER - 7all�z�or STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss : COUNTY OF i ) On this day of 19 5 before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public duly commissions — and sworn, personally appeared 1Sr-v,n "A4 xhett lcyoD V-1j5a bM o me known to be .the individual(s) described in and who executed the foregoing Covenant, and he/she/they acknowledged to me on oath tat they executed the same as their free and voluntary act and deed. VIRGINIA E. EDDY STATE OF WASHINGTON NOTARY P LIC NOTARY --. -- PUBLIC My commi ion expires: c;7 My Commission Expires 2-22.96 WSS51667A -3- EXHIBIT A The legal description for the property commonly known as 1111 Daley Place, Edmonds, Washington 98020 is as follows: Lot 7, Harbor. Hills, according to plats• thereof recorded in Volume 49 of Plats, pages 165-167 inclusive, records of Snohomish County, Washington, recording number 8908085001. t WE= RECORDEb R 4F t Kevin P.. Ha�nchett EXCISE j Lacher 'Halzapfel Sperry' a Ebberson SIRE FIL r.:, V[RE/� r~X U1pE® 100 eata4Street WOO Wlad=. 980 827 Q4 X 9' f.UG 2 71993 Seattle, WA 98104 Kid i SUMS, Saohah3 county ireo3ffer. EASEMENT OVER LOT 8 IH F R`or aV—KIRK SI V LOT 7 HARBOR HILLS THIS AGREMUM is made this to day or August, 1993, between CHRISTIAN and SMRA OLSON, ("Grantors- herein), and the successors and assigns Iof Lot 7 of Harbor gills as legally described hereinafter ("Grantee" herein). This easement supercedes and replaces the previously recorded. easement,.recording number:8909220395 as reflected in Volume 2266, Page 2205-2207 of the Records of.Snobomish county. in acknowledgment of, good and. valuable consideration, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, and in consideration of the performance by Grantee or the covenants,` terms and conditions hereinafter set forth, Grantors hereby ,convey and warrant to. Grantee the following easement: A. A non-exclusive easement across, along, in, upon and under Grantors' property described as Lot 8, Harbor Hills, according to plats thereof, recorded in Volume ` 49 of Plats, on pages 165-167,. inclusive, records of Snohomish county, Washington, recording number 8908085001, for the, non-exclusive rights to access and install .,improvements and. for use in association with the ingress and egress to Lot, 7 of Harbor, Hills, according to Plats thereof recorded. in. Volume 49 of Plats on pages 165-167 inclusive, records of Snohomish County, Washington, recording number 8908085001. B. This easement is granted subject. to: and conditioned upon the following terms, conditions and- covenants which Grantee, hereby.. promises to faithfully observe and perform. 1_ Grantee shall bear and promptly pay all costs and .expenses of construction and maintenance associated with that easement as they relate to the development of Lot 7. 2. drantao shall *at all times exercise their rights hQrwin in accordance ' with the requirements (as from time to time amended), and all applicable etatutes, orders, rules acid • regulations of any public authority having jurisdiction. Page 1 3. In the event Grantee breaches or fails to perform or preserve any. of the terms and conditions herein, and fails to cure such breach for default within ninety (90) days of Grantors giving Grantee written notice thereof, or if not reasonably capable of being. cured within such ninety (90) days, within such period of time as may be reasonable under the circumstances, Grantor may terminate Grantee's rights under this Agreement in addition to and not in limitation of any other remedy of Grantor at law, or in equity, and the failure of Grantor to exereice rights at any time shall not waive crantors' right to terminate for any future broach or default_ 4. Grantorc reserve all rights with respect to their property including, without limitation, the right to grant easements, licenses and permits to others subject to the rights granted in this Agreement. 5. Grantee does hereby release, indemnify and promise to defense and save harmleca crantors from and against any and all lability, loss, damage, expense, actions and claims, including costs and reasonable .attorneys, fees incurred by Grantors in defense thereof, vacurring or arising directly or indirectly or an account of or out of acts or omissions of Grantee and Grantee's servants, agents, employees, and contractors in the exercise of the rights granted herein; PROVIDED, HOWEVER, this paragraph does not purport to indemnify Grantors against liability for damages arising out of bodily, injury to person or damage to property caused by or resulting from the. sole negligence 'of. Grantors or Grantors, agents or employees. 6. The' rights and obligations '.of the .parties shall inure to Me benefit of and be binding upon the respective successors and assigns. Page 2 ejL M(ECUT'ED as of the date hereinabove set forth. Chi s Olson. �.i�r�11W1 Sandra Olson STATE OF WASMNCTON ) B6. COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH ) an this day personally appeared before me Chris and Sandra Olson, to ma know to be the individuals described in and Who ..executed the within and foregoing instrusaant and acknowledged to ate that, they signed the same . as their free , and: voluntary act and- dead for the purposes therein mentioned. GIVEN UNDER MY AAND AND OFFICIAL SEAT. this day of August, 1993. VfRGM E.. EDW Name: STATE OF WA TON: Notary Public In and for the NOTARY _�__ PUBLIC State of Washington residing . �� 1A�r Comrsdssior► £x0s �22 at(� Commission, Expires - - q 0 4a V V I& 1L A'S H E R, HOLZAPFEL SPERRY& EBBERSON ATTORNEYS AT LAW 6000 WESTLAND BLDG. 100 S. KING STREET SEATTLE. WA 98104-2869 4206) 624-1230 FAX 4206)340.2563 RONALD E. BRALEY LINDA KELLEY EBBERSON ANTHONY J.W. GEWLD RICHARD R. HACK. JR. KATHLEEN HEALY KEVIN P. HANCHETT DELNEY N. HILEN GEORGE S. HOLZAPFEL MARGO T. KELLER LISA ANN KOKENGE EARL P. LASHER III. P.S. JOE MENTOR. JR. DEAN A. MESSMER DANIAL D. PHARRIS ROBIN WILLIAMS PHILLIPS SHANNON SPERRY DAVID J. SPRINKLE PAUL A. TONELLA OF COUNSEL MICHAEL K. MURRAY. P. S. June 14, 1994 Lyle Chrisman City of Edmonds 250 Fifth Avenue North Edmonds, WA 98020 Rp/ 111 107 Daley Place J Dear Mr. Chrisman: J U N 1 6 1994 ENGINEERING Direct Line 654-2430 This letter is being submitted to you in regards to the driveway and walkway on Lot 7 and Lot 8 of Harbor Hills, commonly known as 1107 and 1111 Daley Place. The undersigned propertyowners have accepted the driveway at the entrance to the properties at its current dimension of 9'6". It is understood that the driveway was made slightly narrower in order to accommodate the sidewalk which was built to code. If you have any questions in regards to this matter. Very truly yours, LASHER HOLZAPFEL SPERRY & EBB SON Kevin P. Hanchett KPH/ge cc: Brian Comstock Homestyle Construction Agre to by: Brian Comstock Date: /e Ap c1 d. S- xgneMstt eACo �t htor ; AutYi.Agent JUN 16 1994 Y � Date:y---------------------- 890 199 CITY OF EDMONDS 250 - 5TH AVE. N. • EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (206) 771-0220 • FAX (206) 771-0221 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT Public. Works • Planning *'Parks and Recreation • Engineering May 10, 1994 Mr. Kevin Hanchett 22721 96th Avenue West Edmonds, Washington 98026 RE: Permit #930535 @ 1n1411�:�Daley Place LAURA M. HALL MAYOR The City'Engineering Division has informed me that extensive grading and rockery work has been completed on the northeast property line of the subject site and appears to deviate:from the approved plan and geotechnical report. Chapter 19.05 of the ECDC requires that omissions or deviations from the geotechnical report and/or approved plans be highlighted and immediately submitted in.a separate letter to the City for review. Please instruct your .geotechnical engineer to make the appropriate investigations and respond to the City in writing regarding this work. A revised as -built site plan shall be included as well as a section detail of the rockery construction. The City shall _review the height of the rockeries that extend above original grade to determine compliance to the zoning code and setback standards. The Engineering Division has also informed me that.the stream -has been altered and may be in violation of the state hydraulics permit. Under separate cover.please respond in writing to Lyle Chrisman as to the extent of stream and bank work and whether this work deviated from the approved hydraulics permit (please enclose a copy of the applicable permits). If there are any questions regarding these issues please feel free to contact myself or Lyle Chrisman at 771-0220. Thank you, x� Jeannine L. Graf Acting Building Official cc:.Mark.McNaughton, Homestyle Construction Lyle Chrisman, Engineering Inspector Ann Bullis, Code Enforcement Officer Mark Dodds, P.E. • Incorporated August 11, 1890 • Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan STREET FIL4 gU1LDlryG A UG Z 1993 APPLICANT/OWNER LIABILITY LANDSLIDE ACKNOWLEDGMENT DECLARATION WE HEREBY WARRANT that all information submitted for the purposes of obtaining a building permit at Lot 7 of Harbor Hills, Edmonds, Washington is accurate and correct,to the best of our knowledge and do hereby relieve the City and its staff from any liability associated with the acceptance and reliance on information provided for permit submittal. Our Application may reference the reports of prior public consultants to the City, but all conclusions are those of the applicant/owner and our design professionals. We also understand and accept the risk of development in an area with potential unstable soils. This statement is drafted and provided to the City of Edmonds as is required to submit for and obtain a building permit in an area that has been designated by the City of Edmonds to be located in an area that requires permit applicants to conform to a set of permanent standards referred to as the. Earth Subsidence/Landslide Hazard Areas Permit Submittal Checklist. The owners will advise, in writing, any perspective purchasers of the site of the slide potential of the area, as called out in Ordinance 2661 of the City of Edmonds. The City of Edmonds requires this letter to accept the building permit Application and to issue permit. DATED this ? day of August, 1993. OWNER: OWNER: Kevin P. Hanchett STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss. COUNTY OF KING ) a building Elisabeth A. Murat On this day personally appeared before me Kevin P. Hanchett, known by me to be the individual described in and who executed the within and foregoing instrument and acknowledged to me that he signed the same as his free and voluntaX.y%N?kM%tmvjpd deed for the purposes therein mentioned. (;3VEN` UNDEij' HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL on this 24 day of gust, 1993,',0 10 ,, , :'�"., Z� NOTARY PU IC in and for .the /i/9J'�,;�:, State of Washington residing too,, at My F WAZo% ' Commission Expires STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss. COUNTY OF KING ) On this day personally appeared before me Elisabeth A. Murata, known by me to be the individual described in and who executed the within and foregoing instrument and acknowledged to me that she signed the same as hi-sle"free and voluntary act and deed for the purposes therein mentioned. GIVEN UNDER MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL on this 24 day of August:`��►1��, —rt`N M. F,yj�yi ,��........ /� �. ....�, Ems. iON ;10 TARY PUBLIC in and for the+� Y ; `NpTgRy ; State of Was ington residing o i at My i�, ' Zdo Commission ` Expires Z�- L A S H E R I HOLZAPFEL SPERRY & EBBERSON ATTORNEYS AT LAW 6000 WESTLAND BLDG. 100 S. KING STREET SEATTLE, WA 98104-2869 (206:624.1230 FAX 206) 340-2563 RONALD E. BRALEY LINDA KELLEY EBBERSON TIMOTHY J. GAVIN ANTHONY J.W. GEWALD RICHARD R. HACK, JR. KEVIN P. HANCHETT DELNEY N. HILEN GEORGE S. HOLZAPFEL MARGO T. KELLER LISA ANN KOKENGE EARL P. LASHER III, P.S. JOE MENTOR. JR. DEAN A. MESSMER DANIAL D. PHARRIS ROBIN WILLIAMS PHILLIPS SHANNON SPERRY DAVID J. SPRINKLE PAUL A. TONELLA James C. Walker, P.E. Assistant City Engineer City of Edmonds 250 Fifth Avenue North Edmonds, WA 98020 RECEIVED AUG 16 1993 ENGINEERING August 13, 1993 Re: Driveway Approach/Walkway and Driveway Slope at 1111 Daley Place, Edmonds Dear Mr. Walker: Enclosed please find the following documents: OF COUNSEL MICHAEL K. MURRAY, P.S. 1. Copy of Easement Over Lot 8 in Favor of Lot 7, Harbor.Hills;-.and: 2. Copy of Easement Over Lot 7 in Favor of Lot 8, Harbor Hills: By separate cover letter, you will receive from Lovell-Sauerland : & Associates, Inc. detailed drawings of walkway construction, including profiles, and how the driveway approach for Lot 8 will meet code and match the grade of Lot 7. This information is being submitted pursuant to your letter of July 30, 1993. To reiterate, the Engineering Division of the City of Edmonds indicated- that it would sign off on the permit application for 1111 Daley Place if the following items were resolved: A. Minimum driveway width of ten (10) feet. B. Ingress/Egress Easement for'Lot 8 across 7, ;or relocation/reconstruction of walkway. C. Pedestrian.Easement to Lot+9'. August 13, 1993 Page 2 D. Detailed drawings of walkway construction, including profiles, and how the driveway approach for Lot 8 will meet code and match the grade of Lot 7. E. New ingress/egress easement between Lots 7 and 8 to supercede the previously recorded easement. All of the listed items have been complied with pursuant to the enclosed documents and the documents that will be forthcoming from Lovell -Sauer land. The only item that is not included is the pedestrian easement from Lot 9. This easement was not necessary because the walkway in question was not relocated. If the documents, as proposed, meet with your approval, please contact me so that I can record the original easements with the Snohomish County Auditor's Department. If you have any questions, please contact me at 654-2430. Sincerely, LASHER HOLZAPFEL SP�ERRRRY & EEEMERSON Kevin P. Hanchett KPH/ge cc: Sharon Nolan, City of Edmonds Permit Coordinator Craig Campbell, Lovell-Sauerland & Associates, Inc. 19400 33rd Ave. West, #200 Lynnwood, WA 98036 Robert Hughes Structural Design Associates 5630 198th St. SW Lynnwood, WA 98036 CITY OFEDMONDS. 250 - 5TH AVE. N. • EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (206) 771-3202. COMMUNITY SERVICES: Public Works o Planning • Parks and Recreation • Engineering 8 C) 90 - 19 July 30, 1993 LARRY S..N.AUGHTEN MAYOR PETER E. HAHN DIRECTOR .BUILDING AUG 0 Z 1993 Robert Huges 5630 - 198th St. S.W. P.. 0. Box. 5366 Lynnwood, WA 98046-5366 SUBJECT:' DRIVEWAY APPROACH WALKWAY AND DRIVEWAY SLOPE AT 1111 DALEY PLACE, EDMONDS, Dear Mr. Hughes, This, letter is a follow-up to our conversation this morning regarding the driveway slope, conflict with the walkway, and driveway width and approach. To re'state-what we'distussed, the minimum driveway width must be-t6n (10) feet exclusive of the' walkway (which must be -physically separate). The maximum grade allowed by code is twenty percent (20%) and after conducting a field investigation, the grade of the walkway reaches almost twenty-seven percent (27 %). This, of course, not only impacts the subject address, but also lot 8. Based on our findings, the driveway approach for lots 8 and 7 needs to be raised to meet the code.. This, in turn, will require the walkway to be raised. In order. for lot 8 to meet minimum driveway width requirements Mr. Hanchett.will need to grant a two (2) foot ingress/egress easement -to lot 8 or relocate the walkway. To move the walkway, lot 9 will need to grant the. City. of Edmonds a pedestrian easement-andthe reconstruction of the walkway, Based on what you said about the. utilities immediately adjacent to the north side of the driveway, relocating the walkway - may be the best. option. If the walkway is to. be rebuilt, it should be constructed as a raised walkway. .According to -the recorded easement (AF#8909220395), lots 7, 8, and 9 share one common driveway. *Based on our. current definition.of 'driveway, if 1hree or more lots are served, the surface is classified as a road and the maximum grade for roads 'i's twelve percent (12%), waivable to fifteen'percent (15%). With that definition,,, -lot 9 --cannot use the common driveway with lots 7 and 8. This then will require a, new • Incorporated August 11,A890 • Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan Robert Hughes July 30, 1993. Page 2 V ingress/egress easement between lots 7 and 8. It should be noted that all ingress/egress easements must get approved by the City before recording. Before the Engineering Division will sign off on the permit application for. I I I I Daley Place, the following must be resolved: a) Minimum driveway width of ten (10) feet. b) Ingress/egress easement for lot 8 across lot 7 or relocation/reconstruction of walkway. c) Pedestrian easement from lot 9. d). Detailed drawings of walkway construction, including profiles, and how the driveway approach for lot 8 will meet code and match the grade of lot 7. e) New ingress/egress easement between lots 7 and 8 to supercede the previously recorded easement. If you have any questions, please call Lyle Chrisman at 771-0220, extension 324. Sincerely a JAMES C. WALKER, P.E. Assistant City Engineer ALC/JCW/sdt c: Kevin Hanchett Sharon Nolan, City of. Edmonds Permit Coordinator l 111 DALY. DOC CITY OF EDMONDS j,. 250 - 5TH AVE. N. • EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (206) 771-3202 COMMUNITY SERVICES: 1 Public Works r. Planning • Parks and Recreation • Engineering 890_19 July 30, 1993 Robert Huges 5630 - 198th St. S.W. P. O. Box 5366 Lynnwood, WA 98046-5366 BB1LU1ryG Jut J U 1993 SUBJECT: DRIVEWAY APPROACH - WALKWAY AND DRIVEWAY SLOPE AT 1111 DALEY PLACE. EDMONDS Dear Mr. Hughes, LARRY S. NAUGHTEN MAYOR PETER E. HAHN DIRECTOR This letter is a follow-up to our conversation this morning regarding the driveway slope, conflict with the walkway, and driveway width and approach. To restate what we discussed, the minimum driveway width must be ten (10) feet exclusive of the walkway (which must be physically separate). The maximum grade allowed by code is twenty percent (20%) and after conducting a field investigation, the grade of the walkway reaches almost twenty-seven percent (27%). This, of course, not only impacts the subject address, but also lot 8. Based on our findings, the driveway approach for lots 8 and 7 needs to be raised to meet the code. This, in turn, will require the walkway to be raised. In order for lot 8 to meet minimum driveway width requirements, Mr. Hanchett will need to grant a two (2) foot ingress/egress easement to lot 8 or relocate the walkway. To move the walkway, lot 9 will need to grant the City of Edmonds a pedestrian easement and the reconstruction of the walkway. Based on what you said about the utilities immediately adjacent to the north side of the driveway, relocating the walkway may be the best option. If the walkway is to be rebuilt, it should be constructed as a raised walkway. According to the recorded, easement (AF#8909220395), lots 7, 8, and 9 share one common driveway. Based on our current definition of driveway, if three or more lots are served, the surface is classified as a road and the maximum grade for roads is twelve percent (12%), waivable to fifteen percent (15%). With that definition, lot 9 cannot use the common driveway with lots 7 and 8. This then will require a new • Incorporated August 11, 1890 • Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan • Robert Hughes July "30, 1993 Page 2 ingress/egress easement between lots 7 and 8. It should be noted that all ingress/egress easements must get approved by the City before recording. Before the Engineering Division will sign off on the permit application for 1111 Daley Place, the following must'be resolved: a) Minimum driveway width of ten (10) feet. b) Ingress/egress easement for lot-8 across lot 7 or relocation/reconstruction of walkway. c) Pedestrian easement from lot 9. d) Detailed drawings of walkway construction, including profiles, and how the driveway approach for lot 8 will meet code and match the grade of lot 7. e) New ingress/egress easement between' lots 7 and 8 to supercede the previously recorded easement. If you have any questions, please call.Lyle Chrisman at 771-0220, extension 324. Sincerely •a�� 1. � ��Q�-�'L . � L . JAMES C. WALKER, P.E. Assistant City Engineer �411'z►� s ALC/JCW/sdt c: Kevin Hanchett Sharon Nolan, City of Edmonds Permit Coordinator 11 l 1 DALY.DOC LANDAU A ASSOCIATES, INC. Environmental and Geotechnical Services July 23, 1993 City of Edmonds 250 Fifth Avenue North Edmonds, WA 98020 Attn: Ms. Sharon Nolan RE: SUPPLEMENTAL GEOTECHNICAL REVIEW PROPOSED RESIDENCE AT 1111 DALEY PLACE LOT 7, HARBOR HILLS SUBDIVISION EDMONDS WASHINGTON Dear Ms. Nolan: Per your request we have completed a supplemental review of resubmitted documents concerning the above proposed residence. Our April 15, 1993 and July 6, 1993 letters provide preliminary and previous supplemental review comments. Resubmitted documents included the following: a response letter from Structural Design Associates, dated July 15, 1993 (signed and stamped by Kase Vanden Ende, P.E.); a review letter from Dodds Geosciences Inc., dated July 16, 1993 (signed and stamped by Mark K. Dodds, P.E.); and Sheet 6 of the Architectural Plans, prepared by design Consultants, with a revision date of July 15, 1993. The project team has responded to our original and supplemental review comments in the current submittal. In our opinion the responses are generally adequate, except as noted below. For the response to Item 11 (wall backfill), it is our opinion that it is preferable to place a free draining material adjacent to the lower portion of the east foundation wall, rather than the "structural fill" called for on the Architectural Plans, Sheet 6. Since the applicant's design team has consciously chosen the present design, and since poor performance of this wall would probably not result in a life -threatening situation, no City response appears necessary. Our final comment in our July 6, 1993 letter (unnumbered) regarding detention system maintenance was not addressed in the resubmittal. No additional comments from Landau Associates on that subject are necessary. P.O. BOX 1029 • EDMONDS, WA 98020.9129 • (206) 778-0907 • FAX (206) 778-6409 SPOKANE: (509) 327.9737 • FAX (509) 327-9691 / TACOMA: (206) 926-2493 • FAX (206) 926-2531 0 Please call if you have questions regarding this letter, or if future review is needed. WDE/DL/bb No. 74045.10 Three Copies Submitted 07/23/93 JAEDMONMREVIEW177 P LANDAU ASSOCIATES, INC. William D. Evans, CPG and 6,� - 0 Deborah Ladd Senior Staff Engineer LANDAU ASSOCIATES, INC. DO D Geosciences Inc. 2063918270 P. 01 s Im is 1W %F mw 1W_ 1W GEOSCIENCES INC. Post Office Box 6966 Bellevue, WA 98008-0966 Telephone (206)391-8265 facslmlle (206)391-8270 77 R R � RECEIVED J UL, 6 1993 PERMIT COUNTER PERMIT COUNTER To: Kevin Hanchett Job Number 160 c/o Lasher Haozapfel Sperry & Ebberson July 16,1993 6000 Westland Building 100 South King Street Seattle, Washington 98104-2869 Subject: Final Response Lot 7, Harbor Hills Subdivision Edmonds, Washington Reference: 1) Hanchett Residence at Lot 7, Harbor Hills, Edmonds, Washington -LEAD DESIGN RESPONSE - by Structural Design Associates Inc. dated July 15, 1993 2) Final Plan Review Set Including 3 Sheets of Civil Plans by LSA, and 11 Sheep of Architectural, and Structural Plans by SDA. Dear Mr. Hanchett: At the request of die lead design engineer, we have reviewed the lead design response letter and the final plan review set.. It is our opinion that the Lead Design Response (Reference 1 above) is accurate, and that the final. plans are in. full compliance with our previous reconunen.dations. Our declaration statement remains valid. Sincerely: DODDS ci:s Tnc. P� K. 0 "Qb72258`1VA1-� • 1 EXPIRES -// "14V 1 Mark K. Dodds, P.B. MKD/wd i fo.c. Fi�.c LANDAU A ASSOCIATES, INC. Environmental and Geotechnical Services �0 TR7ff-- ET FILE. City of Edmonds 250 Fifth Avenue North Edmonds, WA 98020 Attn: Ms. Sharon Nolan RE: SUPPLEMENTAL GEOTECHNICAL REVIEW PROPOSED RESIDENCE AT 1111 DALEY PLACE LOT 7, HARBOR HILLS SUBDIVISION EDMONDS, WASHINGTON BUILDING JUL - 71993 July 6, 1993 Per your request we have completed a supplemental review of resubmitted documents concerning the above proposed residence. Our April 15,1993 letter provides preliminary review comments. Comments regarding the latest submittal are presented below. The numbering scheme is the same used in our April 15, 1993 letter. Attachment 1 contains a list of resubmitted documents. 1. The "Meadowdale" Ordinance (No. 2661) requires a topographic map reflecting existing conditions. It is our opinion that the June 1,1989 survey submitted as part of the permit application does not reflect existing site conditions and, therefore, does not meet the requirements of the ordinance. Based on onsite observations made by representatives of Landau Associates, fill placed onto Lot 7 from Lot 6 was regraded, but not removed. This ' is supported by test pit lots provided in Dodd Geosciences, Inc. June 1992 preliminary report which shows up to 9 ft of fill (versus up to 6.5 ft of fill noted by Cascade Geotechnical in May 1989). We recommend that the City require an accurate topographic survey, to be used as the basis for estimating cut/fill volumes, cut slope assessment, rockery design, etc. 2. Adequately addressed. P.O. BOX 1029 • EDMONDS, WA 98020-9129 • (206) 778-0907 • FAX (206) 778-6409 SPOKANE: (509) 327-9737 • FAX (509) 327-9691 / TACOMA: (206) 926-2493 • FAX (206) 926-2531 3. As noted on the revised Civil Plans (Sheet 1, 5/24/93 revision), construction of the house foundations will require shoring, or permission from the owner of Lot 6 to temporarily excavate over the property line. We recommend that the city not issue a construction permit until it has received either: 1) shoring plans, or 2) written permission from the owner of Lot 6 for excavation over the property line. 4. Adequately addressed. 5. The current responses do not address our comment. Cut and fill quantities shown on the revised Civil Plan Sheet 1 are the same as presented in the original submittal. As noted in No. 1 above, these quantities should be recalculated based on an accurate topographic survey The response also does not address disposal of soil which may be unsuitable for reuse on Lot 7. If this soil is to be placed or stockpiled on adjacent properties, the City should determine if a conditional use or grading permit will be needed for the adjacent lot(s). The calculated cut and fill quantities will, in part, be used to estimate truck traffic during construction. Previous concerns regarding construction traffic in the area reinforces the need for good cut/fill volume estimates. 6. Same comment, will be addressed if cut/fill quantities are recalculated. 7. Adequately addressed. 8. The information provided regarding the lower floor. and footing elevations of the structure on Lot 6 is based on Lot 6 building plans, and has not been field verified. The "Meadowdale" Ordinance requires that adjacent structure elevations be field surveyed whenever possible. 9. We suggest that a note be added to the project plans stating that it is the contractor's responsibility to monitor slopes when the geotechnical engineer is not at the site. 07/06/93 JAEDM0NDS\L017SUP.LTR 2 LANDAU ASSOCIATES, INC 10. We reiterate our original comment. It is our opinion that the total wall height and any imposed surcharge should be used to determine the appropriate equivalent fluid soil pressure. However, we recognize, that differences of opinion occur between qualified professionals. Since the current design team takes responsibility for satisfactory long- term performance of this wall, we suggest the City accept the current design, provided drainage provisions in Item 11 below are incorporated. 11. The response is incomplete. The construction sequence (Item 10 as noted on Sheet 2 of the Civil Plans) does not describe the extent of, or specification for, drain rock backfill behind foundation walls. Dodd's report dated June 15, 1992 describes wall backfill between the east foundation wall and an adjacent augercast wall, but does not address the current open cut configuration. Therefore, we recommend that a detail be placed on the Civil Plans showing the extent and type of foundation wall backfill. The use of the term "structural fill," as presently defined for wall backfill is unacceptable, unless "wet weather structural fill" is specified. 12. A rockery wall of up to 12 ft height has been proposed for the east side of the driveway. Dodd's geotechnical report dated June 15, 1992 provides recommendations for rockery walls up to 8 ft in height. We recommend that Dodd's specifically comment on the rockery design presented on Sheet 3 of the Civil Plans. 13. We are not aware of any subsurface geotechnical information describing conditions at the proposed shear key elevation. Due to unknowns regarding soil and groundwater conditions it may not be possible to construct the shear key as presently envisioned (i.e., open cut, concrete poured against soil). The project team should be aware of the potential for construction difficulties, and must be prepared to address difficult field conditions. 14. No comment. 07/06/93 IAEDM0NDS\L0T7SUPJ.TR 3 LANDAU ASSOCIATES, INC. 15. This comment was only partially addressed. We recommend that the drawings clearly show 6 inches of free draining underslab fill and a PVC vapor barrier, as recommended in Dodd's June',15, 1992 geotechnical report. It has been our experience that if underslab drainage details are not clearly shown on the plans, they are often omitted or poorly done. 16. The current response addresses fill placed within 15 ft of the rock lined swale. The response is silent on excavating or other regrading that may occur within the 15-ft setback. We suggest that the City monitor activities to determine if Critical Areas Ordinance provisions are being met. 17. The Civil Plans do not reflect Dodd's recommendation that the driveway be moved 5 ft back from the top of slope. Also, Dodd's statement that "the majority of the outside slope of the asphalt pathway is sloped -near a 2:1" is not supported by topographic data, and.may be incorrect for the driveway segment nearest Daley Place (the most critical area). We recommend the City assess driveway geometry and construction requirements, as there may be several unresolved issues. 18. Adequately addressed. 19. Dodd's June 18, 1993 response, with professional engineering stamp, addressees our comment. Lastly, the current revised civil plan, sheet 1 of 3, now shows a detention system. City ordinance requires a written statement regarding maintenance of such systems. If not already received in another form, we recommend that the City require the maintenance statement be included on the drawing. 07/06/93 JAEDM0NDS\L0T7SUP.LTR 4 LANDAU ASSOCIATES, INC. Because of the number of items where classification is needed, Landau Associates recommends a review of resubmitted documents and responses to verify that the issues raised in this supplemental review, and our original review, are adequately addressed. Please call if you have questions regarding this letter, or when future review is needed. LANDAU ASSOCIATES, INC. By: William D. Evans, CPG Project Manager and I�iul�' Deborah Ladd WDE/DL/sms Project Engineer No. 74045.10 Attachment 07/06/93 IAEDM0NDS\L0T7SUP.LTR 5 LANDAU ASSOCIATES, INC. ATTACHMENT 1 LOT 7, HARBOR HILLS SUBDIVISION 2ND SUBMITTAL • Sheets 1 through 11 of the Architectural Plans, prepared by Design Consultants, and stamped by C.D. Vanden Ende of Structural Design Associates, dated January 12, 1993 with latest revisions dated April 6, 1993. • Sheets 1, 2, and 3, Drainage and Grading Plans, prepared by Lovell-Sauerland & Associates, Inc., and stamped by C. M. Campbell, dated October 12, 1992, with latest revisions dated May 24, 1993 and Sheet 3 dated June 15, 1993. • Geotechnical Response by Dodd Geosciences, Inc., June 8, 1993. • Handwritten response from Structural Design Associates, dated June 18,1993. • Response from Lovell-Sauerland & Associates, Inc. dated May 21, 1993. 07/06/93 J:\EDM0NDS\L0T75UP.LTR 6 LANDAU ASSOCIATES, INC. RECEIVED ja 19400 33rd Ave. W., Suite 200 Lovell-Sauerland MAY 241993 _ Lynnwood, Washington 98036 (206) 775.1591 ■ ■ & Associates, Inc. 1 Seattle: (206).340-0830 Engineers/Surveyors/Planners/Development Consultants FAX: (206) 672.7998 Mr. Robert Hughes 5630 198th Street SW Structural Design Associates Lynnwood, WA 98036 Subject: Lot 7; Harbor Hills Dear Robert: May 21, 1993 LSA File No. 2355.02 RECEIVED JUN 18 1993 PERMIT COUNTER We have completed our review of the Landau Associates comments on this project and have modified the drawings as considered necessary. These modifications include information from my conversations with Mark Dodds of Dodds Geosciences, and his letter to Kevin Hanchett of May 12, 1993. My comments are numbered to correspond to the comments by Landau Associates. Missing numbers in the sequence indicate we have no comment. 1. As we previously discussed, the topography was not updated. It is my understanding that the fill material from lot 6 was substantially removed after house construction, and that the existing topography is adequate. I understand that the City requires the house elevation to be based on the original lot topography. 3. The construction sequence for the site includes open excavation of the foundation. It is intended that the excavation be done according to the geotechnical engineer's recommendations, and that it be monitored by the geotechnical engineer. In the event that subsurface conditions are not as expected the geotechnical engineer will make the determination whether soldier piles are necessary. 4. The cut and fill quantity estimates are based on the original topography as shown on the plan. They were calculated using site cross sections may vary somewhat from actual site excavation. 5. The construction sequence has been modified. 6. Information has been provided on the adjacent structure upslope. This information was obtained from construction plans and was not field verified. 7. The footing drain detail shows free -draining material to be placed behind foundation walls to within 2 feet of the surface as recommended by the geotechnical engineer. 8. Per the geotechnical engineer's letter, the footing drain remains unchanged. Mr. Robert Hughes Page 2 9. The plan has been modified to limit fill to locations outside the 15 foot setback. The reduction in fill quantity is negligible. I believe these comments and the plan revisions address all the comments related to our area of responsibility. If you have any questions, please call me. Sincerely, Craig Campbell, P.E. LANDAU A ASSOCIATES, INC. Environmental and Geotechnical Services City of Edmonds 250 Fifth Ave. N. Edmonds, WA 98020 Attn: Ms. Sharon Nolan RE: PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNIC AL REVIEW PROPOSED RESIDENCE AT 1111 DALEY PLACE LOT 7, HARBOR HILLS SUBDIVISION EDMONDS, WASHINGTON ST April 15, 1993 Per your request, we have reviewed geotec-hnical reports, proposed building plans, and other documents related to construction of the above -noted proposed single-family residence. This preliminary review was conducted using City Ordinance No. 2661 and the UBC as the standards for comparison. A listing of documents which we reviewed is included as Attachment A. The "Meadowdale" permit process was adopted primarily to regulate sites where risks of earth subsidence and landslide hazard exist. However, requirements of Ordinance No. 2661 can also be imposed on sites that are within environmentally sensitive areas or which are adjacent to a known hazard area. The City's decision to use Ordinance No. 2661 for Lot 7 indicates that the City considers this lot to be located within one of these areas. Information required by Ordinance No. 2661 includes, but is not limited to: 1) a landslide hazard map (not required for the Harbor Hills subdivision); 2) owner's liability statement; 3) environmental checklist; 4) topographic map; 5) geotechnical report; 6) site development plan; 7) drainage plan; 8) structural drawings; and 9) disclosures, declarations, covenants, and waivers. In addition, the City -nay require the installation of piezometers for an assessment of landslide potential based on seasonal ground water changes. In Cascades Testing Laboratories, Inc's December 5, 1984 Phase I report for the Harbor Hills Subdivision, a main interceptor drain and series of individual lot drains were recommended. Subsequent to that report, the responsibility for lot drainage was apparently passed to individual lot owners. We understand that this shifting of responsibility has been approved by the City of Edmonds. A June 15, 1992 report prepared by Dodds Geosciences (Dodds) specifically for Lot meets most of the technical requirements of Ordinance No. 2661 for Se„technical reports. Specific comments concerning t; Ie proposed residence and site -specific docuixte>_its are presented below: P.O. BOX 1029 • EDMONDS, WA 98020-9129 • (206) 778-0907 • FAX (206) 778-6409 SPOKANE: (509) 327-9737 • FAX (509) 327-9691 / TACOMA: (206) 926- 2493 • FAX (206) 926-2531 The topography shown on the site Drainage and Grading Plan appears to be from a June 1,1989 survey, and precedes fill placement on the site resulting from adjacent Lot 6 development. We recommend that the topographic survey for Lot 7 be updated to reflect present site conditions. The updated topography may potentially impact foundation/retaining wall design, house elevation siting, extent and quantities of cut and fill, and impacts to adjacent properties. The revised topography and any impacts to design elements should be reviewed by the design professionals involved. 2. Based on an April 1, 1993 conversation between Steve Lidicker of Structural Design Associates (SDA) and Deborah Ladd of Landau Associates, we were informed that an open cut will be used to construct the eastern basement walls of the proposed residence, instead of the temporary retaining wall recommended by the geotechnical engineer in Dodds' June 15, 1992 report. The geotechnical engineer must provide a signed and stamped statement of review of this change (based on the revised topographic information). 3. If an open excavation is used during construction of the eastern basement retaining walls, cut slopes constructed according to recommendations in the geotechnical report will daylight outside of the northeast property line. The expected excavation should be shown on site plans and permission, for earthwork on adjacent property acquired, or shoring should be designed. 4. To reduce the chance of excavation slope failure due to soft or wet fill placed east of the proposed residence, minimum compaction requirements for this fill should be provided by the geotechnical engineer. 5. Large quantities of cut material may not be suitable for reuse at the site as backfill due to organic content or high moisture content. If unsuitable soil is to be placed or stockpiled on adjacent properties, a grading permit for those sites may be required. The lead design professional should indicate the correct volume. 6. The cut and fill quantities noted on the Drainage and Grading Plan sheet' do not agree with the quantities noted in the City of Edmonds Environmental Checklist. 7. The construction sequence noted on the Drainage and Grading Plan, and in the geotechnical report, should be adjusted to reflect the likely sequence of basement excavation prior to filling east of the residence. 8. The lower floor and footing elevations of structures on adjacent properties (such as Lot 6), have not been identified on the topographic map, per Ordinance No. 2661. We recommend that this information be provided and that the geotechnical engineer re - review this information to assess concerns related to the proximity of the Lot 7 basement excavation to the upslope residence. 9. Due to the anticipated depth of the basement excavation and the close proximity of the house on Lot 6, we recommend that the site geotechnical engineer determine if excavation monitoring will be required. If so, the type of system, frequency of reading, maximum amounts of movement allowable, individual responsibilities, etc. should be identified. 04/15/93 JAEDM0NDS\L017.N0T 2 LANDAU ASSOCIATES, INC. 10. Dodds geotechnical report recommends lateral active earth pressure of 40 pounds per cubic ft (pcf) (equivalent fluid) to be used for the east foundation wall, unless the wall is designed to be less than 12 ft in height. Per a conversation with Steve Lidicker of SDA on April 1,1993, an equivalent fluid lateral earth pressure of 30 pcf has been used in the structural design for the east basement wall, apparently because the wall is designed in a stair -step configuration, with the upper portion of the wall (from the ground surface to the crawl space foundation) less than 12 ft in height. It is our opinion that the total wall height (from the adjacent ground surface to the base of the wall) should be used when determining the active pressure to be used for design, even when individual wall sections are less than 12 ft in height. Additionally, the crawl space foundation along the east part of the house will transmit loads to the active pressure zone adjacent to the lower portion of the basement wall. These transmitted loads will increase the lateral active earth pressures acting against the lower portion of the basement wall. The geotechnical engineer must review and comment on the present wall configuration and the earth pressures used for design. 11. The active earth pressures presented in the Dodds geotechnical report are appropriate only for well drained and suitably compacted backfill adjacent to the basement wall. The extent and type of wall backfill should be shown on the plans and described in the construction notes. 12. The design for the "keystone" retaining wall on the east side of the driveway should be presented as part of the design plans. Typically, keystone type walls over about 4 ft require soil reinforcing elements to be used with the wall. Issuing a separate permit for this wall should be avoided, since it is critical to satisfactory performance of the project. The keystone retaining wall and the rockery wall drainage should be shown on the site Drainage and Grading plan. 13. A construction sequence for the basement wall shear key should be provided, including limitations on width and length of the excavation for the shear key. Also, the drawings should state or show the type of backfill, if present, to be used around the concrete shear key. If permeable backfill, such as drain rock, is used around the shear key, a drain at the base, tied to the underslab trench drain system, should be considered. Compaction requirements for shear key soil backfill should be provided, if appropriate. 14. The footing drain detail shown on the site Drainage and Grading Plan does not agree with footing drains shown on the structural/architectural plans (Sheet 6). In our opinion, the footing drain should be shown as constructed at the elevation of the base of the footing, as is shown on the structural/architectural plans. 15. The Dodds report recommends that floor slabs be supported on a minimum of 6 inches of free draining sand or gravel with a vapor barrier.. Underslab fill should be shown clearly on the plans and details. 16. The Drainage and Grading Plan shows fill within about 5 ft of the rock -lined swale at the north portion of the site. This fill appears to be within a 15 ft buffer zone for this drainage feature. The City of Edmonds should review this proposed fill for conformance with applicable regulations. 04;15M JAEDM0NDS\L0T7N0T 3 LANDAU ASSOCIATES, INC. 17. At present, the outside slope of the asphalt pathway (south end of the lot) is at about a 1H:1V (horizontal to vertical) slope, and shows evidence of ground movement (asphalt cracking). Because the construction entrance and completed driveway will be in this location, we recommend that the geotechnical engineer review site conditions at the driveway location and provide recommendations to rehabilitate the slope in this area, as required, to support construction and residential driveway loads. If rehabilitation activities are to occur outside of the property, permission from the adjacent property owner must be acquired. If no rehabilitation is proposed, the City should require documentation on pathway construction (i.e., soil type and compaction) so that a 1H:1V. slope can be justified for long-term performance. 18. The City of Edmonds Environmental Checklist, item 14/d, should note that the driveway also provides access to another lot. 19. The geotechnical Engineering Review and Declaration (Dodds Geosciences, Inc., dated February 25, 1993) should include a professional engineering stamp. Landau Associates recommends a review of resubmitted documents to verify that issues raised in this preliminary review are adequately addressed. Please call if you have questions regarding this letter, or require future review services. LANDAU ASSOCIATES, INC. William D. Evans, CPG Project Manager and 61'J�� 0_2�10U Deborah Ladd Senior Staff Engineer WDE/DL/fas No. 74045.10 Attachment 04/15/93 JAEDMONDS\L017.NOT 14 LANDAU ASSOCIATES, INC. ATTACHMENT A LOT 7, HARBOR HILLS SUBDIVISION • Sheets 1 through 11 of the Architectural Plans, prepared by Design Consultants, and stamped by C.D. Vanden Ende of Structural Design Associates, dated January 12, 1993 with revisions January 27, 1993. • Sheets 1 and 2, Drainage and Grading Plans, prepared by Lovell-Sauerland & Associates, Inc., and stamped by C. M. Campbell, dated October 12,1992, with revisions February 22, 1993. • Vicinity Map, no date. • Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report, by Dodds Geosciences, Inc., June 15, 1992 (Dodds Job No. 160). • Seismic Stability and Construction Slopes, by Dodds Geosciences,Inc., January 28, 1993. • Geotechnical Engineering Review and Declaration, by Dodds Geosciences, Inc., February 25, 1993. • City of Edmonds Environmental Checklist, completed and signed by Mark K. Dodds, February 10, 1993. • Declaration Statement from Structural Design Associates, dated February 26, 1993. • Waiver Request from Structural Design Associates, dated February 26, 1993. • Critical Areas checklist, signed by Robert J. Hughes for Structural Design Associates, dated January 4, 1993. • Covenant of Notification and Indemnification, signed by Kevin Hanchett and Elisabeth Murata .on February 25, 1993. • Acknowledgement Declaration, signed by Kevin Hanchett and Elisabeth Murata on February 25, 1993. • Affidavit of Permit Posting, signed by Kevin Hanchett on February 26, 1993. 04/15/93 JAEDMONMLOUNOT LANDAU ASSOCIATES, INC. 8 .9 0 - 199. - CITY OF. EDMONDS 250 - 5TH AVE. N.. EDMONDS, WA 98020 (206) 771-0220 FAX (206) 771-0221 COMMUNITY SERVICESiDEPARTMENT _ . Public Works • Planning :_ Parks and Recreation, • Engineering March; '3, 1993,: LAURA M. HALL MAYOR Robert J. Hughes 5630 - 198th St.-S.W. P. 0. Box 5366 Lynnwood, WA 98046-5366 Re:— Engineering requirements for 1111 Daley Pl., Hanchett SFR Dear Mr. Hughes, Dur:ing the review of the engineering drawings for the subject single family residence, some concerns arose that.need to be resolved before I e can complete the engineering review: 1 1) What improvements will be done to the access road and has Dodd's GeoScience reviewed+the improvements to answer their concerns about the stability -of the existing road/walkway (their letter dated. June 15, 1992)? 2) What impact will driveway have on remaining driveway for Lot 8? 3) No details have been provided on the retaining wall along the driveway. 4) Eighteen inch yard drain on the driveway and cleanout should be placed within Mr. Hanchett's property. 5) All roof drains must go into storm detention system.- 6) On -site detention system will be required if all roof drains cannot drain to existing plat detention system. 7) Footing and trench drains cannot be connected to the detention system. .They can be connected to the outflow side of the pipe. • Incorporated August 11, 1890 • Sister Cities International Hekinan, Japan Robert J. Hughes March 3, 1993 Page 2 In addition, we need.'a copy of the ingress/egress-easement-for Lot 7 to use Lot 8's driveway for; access.' With the construction of the dri.veway on Lot 8, it will be necessary to install the water service to'Lot 8.., If you have any questions, please call me at 771-0220, extension 324.. Sincerely, ADDISON L. CHRISMAN I.V Engineering Inspector ALC/sdt c: Craig Campbell, Lovell-Sauerland. Sharon Nolan, Permit Coordinator HANCHETT.SFR/TXTST530 -..t LOVELL-SAUERLAND & AQdbr., INC. 19400 33rd Ave. W. Sui 00 LYNNWOOD, WA 98036 LETTAW'TaQa60MoTTaIL Phone (206) 775-1591 Seattle (206) 340.0830 FAX (206) 672.7998 TO City of Edmonds Public Works Department 250 5th Ave Edmonds, WA 98020 DATE JOB NO. ATTENTION RE: r� > WE ARE SENDING YOU ❑ Attached ❑ Under separate cover via the following items: ❑ Shop drawings ❑ Prints ❑ Plans ❑ Samples ❑ Specifications ❑ Copy of letter ❑ Change order ❑ COPIES DATE NO. DESCRIPTION - /--/-- --- Working sketches of driveway slopes THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below: ❑ For approval ❑ For your use ❑ As requested ❑ For review and comment ❑ FOR BIDS DUE ❑ Approved as submitted ❑ Approved as noted ❑ Returned for corrections ❑ Resubmit copies for approval ❑ Submit copies for distribution O Return corrected prints 19 ❑ PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US REMARKS near Lyle, The enclosed are forwarded for your use per our conversation. Call if you have any questions PERMIT COUNTER COPY TO / 4MPre-Consumer Content -IQ% Post -Consumer Content SIGNED: PRODUCT 740 �Inc, Gdm, MM 01471. If enclosures are not as noted, kindly notify us at once. T .. �c Iqjf �.. 1 W cr c if r '� + �' -•-"`�� .�.' •• � `.:.tom (m 1-00 At ev a � J•+,...,+ ,'�tI ++ ••.3�•.�} � t �'� a yl t + /,• fl1 ; • .�,` ` I ,. .� r • .�;A • _ PPP"' a. S �� ✓1 1 1♦ 9ltl M .' I `--'• ��,ti tom. ti •ram: , ' �% s� � t � J � •..� rt��,1� •'♦. a ��`•'E`R+� l VV E ® � MAN 3 1993 � f� t PM1T COUNT v ^ � (J-'"�`.ASt�!sr ; ¢,I � . � fGq',n crL�.;��i�%�i�'',n.:£• / LA S H E R HOLZAPFEL BUILDING SPERRY & EBBERSON �'y' MAR ® 2 1992 ATTORNEYS AT LAW 6000 WESTLAND BLDG. March 1, 1993 100 S. KING STREET SEATTLE. WA 98104-2869 1206) 624-1230 FAX (206)340.2563 RONALD E. BRALEY CHERYL D. CARLSON LINDA KELLEY EBBERSON TIMOTHY J. GAVIN ANTHONY J.W. GEWALD RICHARD R. HACK. JR. KEVIN P. HANCHETT DELNEY N. HILEN GEORGE S. HOLZAPFEL MARGO T. KELLER LISA ANN KOKENGE EARL P. LASHER III, P.S. JOE MENTOR, JR. DEAN A: MESSMER DANIAL D. PHARRIS ROBIN WILLIAMS PHILLIPS SHANNON SPERRY DAVID J. SPRINKLE PAUL A. TONELLA OF COUNSEL MICHAEL K. MURRAY. P. S. lPS�Tl City of Edmonds 250 Fifth Ave. North Edmonds, WA 98020 Re: Permit Application/Driveway Waiver Lot 7, Harbor Hills, 1111 Daley Place Edmonds, Washington Dear Ms. Nolan: Please accept my request to increase the slope of the driveway for the above -referenced site above the 14% standard established by the City. The proposed driveway access to the home has always been contemplated since the final plat was approved by the City of Edmonds. Prior to the conveyance of Lot 8 of Harbor Hills, an' access easement for the driveway was granted in favor of Lot 7 for the placement of the garage for the house on that site. At the time of the plat approval, the City acknowledged that the slope was in excess of 14% for the common driveway to serve Lot 8 and Lot 7, and approved that contemplated use. The level of,the garage has resulted in 9-foot ceilings in the garage which has lowered the driveway grade to its current level and provided a balance to the home design. The driveway was located on the south side of the property to compliment the access contemplated for the development of Lot 8. The house was specifically redesigned in order to result in a slope that would dovetail with the plans which were prepared for Lot 8 of Harbor Hills. The request for an increased grade is consistent with the limitations (P :.A A March 1, 1993 Page 2 established by the City and has been a request that has been granted for Lot! 3 and Lot 1 of Harbor Hills. I appreciate your consideration of this request. Sincerely, LASHER HOLZAPFEL SPERRY & EBBERSON Kevin P. Hanchett KPH/ge cc: Mark McNaughton! 0z CF JECT RE n.LIST V1 kE WC PROJECT NAME: H &-77- PLAN CHECK #: FU ;�LIU PROJECT ADDRESS: 1 Z.E , RECEIPT DATE: REVIEW D BY: (Initial/Dale) P-LAIN.' WATER COMMENTS' FIRE BLD'G'.. SEWER STREET ENG. Setbacks/Variance/Setback Adjustment Conditional Use Permit . .... .... 2 ADB Requirements ............... I . . . . . . . . . . . . Other Zoning Requirements Underground Wiring Required . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .......... ......... . . . . . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Lot Slope 1596 SEPA Environmental Checklist/Hydraulics Permit Tree Cutting Plan 8 Plat/Subdivision Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . Legal Description Verification0111. , R I-1%W - Quit Claim Street Dedications No -------- -------K----ffi --------- ---- -, - - -Al Easements - PublicAF-Hy-aft 05609 fog t?Q 13 * 12 Engineering Storm Drain Review Fee . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Engineering 2.2 Inspection Fee 3ro� .............. . . . . . . . 14 Drainage Plan (On -Site ) ...... .... . Setback - Top of Bank, Stream, Water Courses O, N 16 Setback - Storm Drain Line . .. ...... .. ... . . . . . . . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - 17 Open Ditch - Existing ............... . . . . rt CulveRequired B ill j9 Culvert Size XX., . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .......... . 0 Shoulder Drainage/Shale Open Runoff -21 Catch Basin Required . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Driveway Slope & Vehicle Access 71% ............. 255 75 -.23 Sidewalk Required Curb & Gutter Required 25 Curb Cut For Driveway Required .2 6 Street Paving Required X.. 27. Right -Of -Way Construction Permit Required 28 Street Name Sign Required N 00 Other Signing Required Bond Required For Public Improvements 31 FEMA Map Check/Water Table Ix ............ 32 Side Sewer Availability 4grg WIWI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 C alculate Sewer Connection Fee If No LID # .... . . ..... ... .......... 34 Create Street File SWf3 35: Existing Water Main Size :tiX X. S-*�,..:.il .36 Water Meter Size Service Line Size -3/ly 38 Water Meter Charge Required . . . . . . . 39 Hydrant Required _40 Hydrant Size Existing mom 41 Fire Line Charge Required - Sprinkler 42 Street Cut ------------- 0- 48 [Miscellaneous « 3 44 Reviewed By: FIRE C.-- C., A V ".L ;C, PLANNING �-,- %,", ENGINEERING FREET , aLLC��S PUBLIC WORKS ORUCTURAL DESIGN ASS*IATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 5630. 198TH ST. S.W. . P.O. BOX 5366 00 LYNNWOOD, WA 98046 PHONE:(206)775-7434 February 26, 1993 tME Kevin Hanchett & Liz Murata PILE 22721 - 96th Ave. W. Edmonds, WA 98020 subject: Residence on Lot 7, Harbor Hills, Edmonds, Wash. - DECLARATION STATEMENT - Our Ref.: Letters\91-002.r h Dear Kevin: This letter is to inform you that our office has reviewed the geotechnical report from Dodds Geosciences, Inc. No. 160, dated June 15, 1992, the seismic stability letter dated January 28, 1993, and the declaration letter dated February 25, 1993. The review indicates that the lot is in an area subject to ground failure: "...the probability of earth movement over a period of 25 years will be less than thirty percent.". It is impossible to guarantee future slope stability, regardless of how well it is investigated or engineered, and there are always risks associated with construction in a known hazardous area. Among these risks is the possibility of the loss or damage to your property and life, as well as the property and life of neighbors, public and private, due to soil failure. Because of the unpredictable nature and wet condition of the soils, owners must assume the responsibility for risks of building and living in this known hazardous area. The reports, recommendations, opinions, designs and specifications, associated with this project are professional opinions only, and are not to be construed as a warranty, expressed or implied, against loss or damage. To the best of our knowledge and understanding, the building plans, submitted with the permit application substantially incorporate the above mentioned reports' recommendation. Careful and conscientious application of the above referenced recommendations during and after construction will apparently not increase the risk associated with this site. Respectfully submitted, STRUCTURAL DESIGN ASSOCIATES, INC. by: Kase Vanden Ende, P.E. president KVE/ev �iJCIURhL Er:'GINEERING DESIGN AtiID ItsvES?IGF.N STREET FILE CITY Or EDMONDS 250 STU AVCNUE NORTII. EDMONDS, WA 98020 (206) 7713202 RCW 197-11-970 Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNMCANCE Description of proposal: Conditional Use Permit (City of Edmonds File No. CUG-93-0) for site grading in excess of 500 cubic yards (approximately 772 cubic yards of cut, and 550 cubic yards of fill) in association with the construction of a new single-family residence. Proponent: Kevin Hanchett. Location of proposal, including street address if any: 1111 Daley Place (Lot 7, Harbor Hills). Lead agency: CITY OF EDMONDS The lead agency for this proposal has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement is not required under RCW 43.21.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. There is no comment period for this DNS. XX This DNS is issued under 197-11-340(2); the lead agency will not act on this proposal for 15 days from the date below. Comments must be submitted by March 9th, 1993. Responsible Official: Jeffrey S. Wilson Position/Title: Current Planning Supervisor, Department of Community Services - Planning Division Phone: 771-0220 Address: City of Edmonds, 250 5111 Avenue North, Edmonds, WA 98020 Signature:__. XX You may appeal this determination to Robert Chave, Planning Manager, at 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds, WA 98020, no later than,Alarch 23rd. 1993, by filing a written appeal citing the reasons. You should be prepared to make specific factual objections. Contact Jeffrey S. Wilson to read or ask about the procedures for SEPA appeals. XX Posted on Fehruary 22nd. 1993, at the Edmonds Public Library, Edmonds Community Services Buildin`', and the Edmonds Post Office. XX Distribute to "Checked" A-eneies on the reverse side of this form, along with -a copy of the Checklist. ATTACHMENT 8 FILE NO. CUG-93-6 Mailed to th-646 wing'along with the Environmental Checklist: XX Environmental Review Section XX Department of Ecology P.O. Box 47703 Olympia, WA 98504-7703 XX Department of Fisheries 115 General Administration Building Olympia, WA 98504-8711 XX Department of Wildlife 16019 Mill Creek Boulevard Mill Creek, WA 98012 Kevin Hanchett 22721 96th Ave. W Edmonds, WA 98020 XX Robert J. Hughes Structural Design Associates P.O. Box 5366 Lynnwood, WA 98046 XX MITIGATING MEASURES INCORPORATED INTO THE PROPOSAL: 1. During all site excavation, filling and grading activity, trucks with more than one (1) axle shall be restricted to one (1) trip in a one -hour period (i.e. one (1) truck in and out in a one (1) hour period]. Truck traffic in excess of the specified limit shall be grounds for an immediate "Stop Work" order from the City of Edmonds until the truck traffic schedule is revised to comply with the limits imposed in this mitigation measure. 2. The applicant shall coordinate with other developments occurring within the plat of Harbor Hills to develop a construction vehicle activity schedule to ensure that the cumulative trips of all construction projects occurring in the plat of Harbor Hills does not exceed the standards established in mitigation measure no. 1 above. If more -than one construction project is occurring at the same time, the parties shall submit a construction vehicle trip schedule to the Planning Division prior to the issuance of a building permit for the second site. 3. During all site excavation, filling and grading activity, the applicant shall provide an employee to monitor all truck traffic to and from the site related to the development activity on Lot 1 of Harbor Hills. This person shall maintain a written log of such activity, and shall provide a copy of said log to the City of Edmonds Planning Division on a weekly basis. This employee shall be responsible for immediately notifying the City of Edmonds Planning Division of any violation of traffic limit imposed in mitigation measures 1 and 2 above. 4. Should violations of the traffic restrictions imposed in mitigation measures 1 through 3 above occur, the City of Edmonds shall have the authority to require the applicant to fund the City in hiring a temporary employee to monitor truck traffic to ensure compliance with the stipulated traffic restrictions. 5. The applicant/proponent shall comply with all standards set forth in Chapters 17, 18, 19 and 20 of the Edmonds Community Development Code which are applicable to the proposed site development. 6. The speed of construction vehicles shall be limited to 10 mph within the plat of Harbor Hills during all construction activity. 7. Trips by construction vehicles used in conjunction with the development of the site sliall be restricted to the historical dry season (April 1st to October 31st) of each year. This time period may be either extended or restricted by the Building Official, if in his opinion based on meteorological reports from the National Weather Service and ground water conditions in the immediate vicinity Page 2 of 3 93<unsrz-18-93.scrA Of the site (by use of piezometers in place on adjacent properties), that weather conditions are either wetter or dryer than normal for that given time of the year. 8: The type of construction vehicles used during construction of the residence shall be those evaluated during vibration tests conducted in association with the approval of the plat of Harbor Hills, and tests conducted subsequent to the approval of the plat, in studies conducted by Sigmund Schwartz between January 1989 and August 1990. Attachment Pe: File No. CUG-93-6 SEPA Notebook Paul hoar. Community Services Director Robert Chavc. Planning Manger Pa.-t 3 o(3 931a)n Cf�-15-93.Cfa'A • Mft GEOSCIENCES INC. Post oftice BOX 6966 Bellevue, WA 96008-0966 Telephone (206)391-8255 FacSlmile (206)391-8270 StEET 111E BUILDING FEB 2 6 1992 Hotnestyle Construction. 22:1 James Street, Suite 100 Edrnonds, WA 98020 Attention: Mark McNaughton Subject: Geotechnical Engineering Review and Declaration Lot 7, Harbor Hills Subdivision Edmonds, Washington Reference: 1) Drainage, Grading, and T.E. & S.C. Plan for Mark McNaughton : 2 Sheets by Lovell - Sauerland & Associates, Inc. last revised 2/22/93; signed by Craig Campbell 2) Architectural Plans entitled Residence for Kevin Hanchett & Liz Murata - 10 Sheets by Design Consultants dated 1/27/93; signed by Cornelis D. Vanden Ende 3) City of Edmonds Environmental Checklist dated 2/10/93 by DODDS Geosciences Inc. Gentlemen: Job Number 160 February 25, 1993 1h accordance with your request, this letter transn-its the results of our review of the geoteelmical aspects of the referenced plans and checklist. Our review revealed that the referenced plans and specifications conform to recotmnendations pn;sented in our soils report. In accordance with City of Edrnonds requirements, the following stoement is made: In our judgement the referenced plans and specifications conform to the rei;orrunendati.ons in the geotecWcal report; The risk of damage to the proposed development, and to adjacent prolertip.-Z firm en's) inctahility will hP minitmsi, subject to the conditions set forth in the report. The proposed development will not increase the potential for soil movement. We esimate that the statistical probability of earth movement over a 25-year period will be less than 30 percent. Th.e two deep drainage trenches which extend under the home reduce this risk significantly. If there are any questions please contact me directly at 391-8255. Sincerely: DODDS Geosciences Inc. MKD/wd ^E'EIVED Mark K. Dodds, P.E. FEB 251993 SDA, INC. 9 1 — t1 n ,71 p.CJlEj 3�23193 • ndmnne GEOSCIENCES INC. Post Office Box 6966 Bellevue, WA 98008-0966 Telephone (206)391-8255 Facsimile (206)391-8270 STREET FILE Kevin Hanchett c/o Homestyle Construction 221 James Street, Suite 100 Edmonds, WA 98020 Attention: Mark McNaughton Subject: Seismic Stability and Construction Slopes Lot 7, Harbor Hill Subdivision Edmonds, Washington Reference: Construction Plans entitled Residence for Kevin Hanchett & Lisa Murata drawn by Structural Design Associates, Inc. undated and unsigned; Sheets 1 through 10 Gentlemen: F E B 021993 O DA, INC. Job Number 160 January 28,1993 In accordance with your request, this office has reviewed the referenced plans. The purpose of our review was to evaluate: 1) The long-term seismic stability of the lot after construction is completed and, 2) The impact of temporary construction slopes on the adjacent property. Long -Term Slope Stability The stability of the final slope conditions on the site were investigated in accordance with the Meadowdale Criteria (City of Edmonds Ordinance #2661). The results of our computer analyses where hundreds of potential slip circles were studied are summarized on Plate 1. This plate shows the results of our analysis for finished construction conditions when two subsurface drains a minimum of six feet below the proposed floor slab are installed in accordance with the recommendations below. The results indicate that the minimum Factor of Safety computed under the assumed conditions is 1.22, which is, in our opinion, a reasonable factor of safety when earthquake loads are included. For comparison, our analysis indicates that without earthquake loading, the Factor of Safety increases to 2.44. Our study demonstrates to our satisfaction that the site will become more stable, and will remain stable after the development has been completed if our recommendations are followed, even under conditions where a moderate earthquake is occurring. The stability of the property under earthquake loading is reinforced through the placement of two large six-foot (6 ' ) deep subsurface drainage trenches under the third points of the proposed residence and the western yard. We recommend the drainage trenches be at least three feet wide and be constructed utilizing a six-inch-diamter slotted PVC pipe that is sloped to drain, and bedded in a minimum of one foot of drain rock. The trenches are generally constructed by excavating the trench, lining the trench walls with a permeable geotextile cloth, placing the drain rock bedding, placing the slotted PVC pipe, filling the trench, and wrapping the filter cloth over the top of the drain rock. The drain rock extends up to floor slab bedding sand (if under the home), or to two feet below the ground surface (in the yard west of the house). For that portion of the trench in the yard, the top of the drain is sealed utilizing clayey topsoil. Trenches should begin near the lower portion of the basement wall, extend under the home, and drain off to the west. We anticipate the upper (eastern) elevation of the trenches will be near elevation 200 feet. LOT 7, HARBOR HILLS January 28, 1993 Job Number 160 Page 2 Temporary excavation slopes for this project must meet all applicable government safety regulations. Temporary cuts to a depth off four feet may be attempted vertical. In general, excavation slopes greater than four feet in depth should be sloped to a maximum gradient of 1.5:1 (Horizontal:Vertical) to the bottom of the peaty soils. Temporary slopes of 1:1 (H:V) are adequate in the dense sandy soils underlying the peat. These general recommendations may be modified during construction, depending upon observed site conditions. It appears that construction slope easements may be required for the adjacent property to the east. If temporary easements cannot be obtained, shoring will be required. Water should not be allowed to flow uncontrolled over the top of the temporary slope. Miscellaeneous Comments Waterproofing of the basement walls is required. Wall backfill is not shown on the plans, but should consist of a free -draining sand as described on page 6 of our June 15, 1992 report. If there are any questions concerning this letter, or if we can be of other service, please contact the undersigned directly at 391-8255. Sincerely: DODDS Geosciences Inc. 7 10� K. D� �.Q;�oF WASy��Y' �: 2zsoe 4AM ' F � o. I EXPIRES 4-// 7S1 /4t/ 1 Mark K. Dodds, P.E- MKD/wd SB-SLOPE Simplified Bishop Slope Stability Analysis PROJECT: Lot 7, Harbor Hills, Permanent Structure under Earthquake Loa LOCATION: Edmonds, Washington FILE: JN160C COMPLETE SLOPE CROSS SECTION CIRCLE X Y RADIUS FS 1 73.2 230.7 39.2 2.12 2 100.9 252.3 74.0 1.27 3 105.0 '264.0 84.8 1.22 320 305 290 275 Z O H Q 260 W J W 245 230 215 200 185 170 15 30 45 60 75 90 105 120 135 HORIZONTAL DISTANCE DODDS GEOSCIENCES INC. is M E M O R A N D U M May 1, 1990 TO: File 1107 Daley Place FROM: Dan Smith, Engineering Inspector SUBJECT: LOT NO. 8 - DRIVEWAY SLOPE The City Engineer authorizes :the driveway slope at 1107 Daley Place to exceed 14%, up to a maximum of 19%, as it has been determined that: a. The driveway is the only economically and environmentally reasonable alternative. b. The driveway does not present a traffic, pedestrian, bicycle or safety hazard. C. The Police Chief and Fire Chief have concurred in allowing the increased driveway slope., d. The public health, safety and general welfare will not be adversely affected. DS/RJA/sdt V� 1107DALY/TXTST530 • • MEMORANDUM DATE: February 27, 1990 TO: Mary Lou Block Planning Manager FROM: Jeannine L. Graf Permit Coordinator SUBJECT: HANCHETT SINGLE FAMILY AT 1111 DALEY PLACE Attached please find a copy of a City letter dated February 20, 1990 outlining the outstanding items needed for submittal on this project. As you know, the City Council imposed the Meadowdale checklist standards on this plat. As of this date, Mr. Hanchett has failed to submit the -minimum material necessary to begin plan checking. In his letter dated 2/21/90, received by the Building Division on 2/26/90, he has only addressed a few of the items that are needed for initial review. Plan checking cannot begin until all materials are submitted for review. Item #1: Request waiver from architect's stamp on plans - This decision can be made by the Building Official. However, the premise is that licensed professionals be used to assure a minimum standard that may not be achieved by non -licensed persons. DECISION: Architects stamp required. Item #2: Request waiver from providing Owner's Liability Statement and Covenant To Notify - The face of the recorded plat has this language (copy attached); however, this item should be addressed by Scott Snyder. DECISION: Hanchett to complete new covenant form. Item #3: The Hold Harmless Agreement enclosed with his letter must also be signed by his spouse and it will be returned to him. DECISION: Hanchett has provided this document. Item #4: Mr. Hanchett has proposed a construction bond to be posted in an amount between $10,000 to $15,000. I will ask that Bobby Mills provide me with a memo as to the cost for public improvements. Other costs will be calculated and approved by the Building Official, per Peter Hahn. Item #5: Mr. Hanchett acknowledges his responsibility to post a insurance policy in the amount of one million dollars. He has not yet submitted a copy of this bond to the Building Division. 0 � 0 Memo To Mary Lou Block February 27, 1990 Page Two Item #6: Mr. Hanchett states his contractor, Homestyle Construction, has the appropriate liability insurance, as required. No copy has been provided to the Building Division. Item #7: Mr. Hanchett is asking for a waiver from posting general public liability insurance. This should be addressed by Scott Snyder. DECISION: Insurance required. Item #8: Mr. Hanchett states that a tree cutting plan is not necessary because all trees have been removed from the site. This statement should be sufficient for Planning to sign off on this item. Item #9: Mr. Hanchett is proposing to begin construction on April 1. In my opinion, given the many items he has failed to submit, and the highly complex plans checking that is required, it is very unlikely that he could have a permit by his deadline date. JLG/sfn I . ��;, 9 0 ILA S HER IHOLZAPFEL !SPERRY& EBBERSON' ATTORNEYS AT LAW 6000 WESTLAND BLDi. t00 S. KING STREET 5 EATTLE.WA 96104-2e'69 1206) 624-1230 FAX (206) 340-2563 RONALD E. BRALEY lOHN P. DUGGAN LUNDA KELLEY EBBE=_N Peter E . Hahn iiECEIVED FEB 2 3 1990 Communiiv Services Dir BU(LDINQ February 21, 1990 FEB 2 6 1990 ANTHONY 1.H AL= city o f Edmonds 'RICMARD R. HACK.' KEVIN P. HANCHETT 250 5th Ave. North G EN. HEN Edmonds WA 98020 G EORGORGE S. HO/ L2APFEL MARGO T. KELLER EARL P. LASHER III. F.S. MARK A. LEVIN Re: Application for Permit for Home at DEAN A. MESSMER 1111 Daley Place 7ANIAL D. PHARRIS ROBIN WILLIAMS PHI.LIRS WILLIAM A. SNYDER Dear Peter: SHANNON SPERRY DAVID J. SPRINKLE PAUL A. TONELLA I have received a list of items which Janine has indicated need to supplement my application for permit for the construction of my home at 1111 Daley Place. I would like to address some of those items by way of this letter. First, Janine indicated that the plans must be stamped by a licensed architect. The architect who prepare the plans for my wife and I is Mr. Ron Johnson. Mr. Johnson is technically a designer, although he is just short of obtaining his licensed architect status. I believe that the City of Edmonds is well aware of Mr. Johnson's work and has approved prior -plans submitted by this architect. Accordingly, I would request that the requirements that the plans be stamped by a licensed architect be waived. The second item which Janine called out in her list was the owner's liability statement. In order to address the concerns of the City Council, the liability statement was recorded on the face of the Plat. The Plat is on record with the County Auditor, and this should satisfy that requirement. Additionally, the covenant in regards to the Meadowdale Slide Ordinance is also recorded on the face of the Plat to give notice to all parties in interest. In regards to the requirements of the Indemnity and Hold Harmless Agreement enclosed please find the original notarized Agreement. February 21, 1990 Page 2 In regards to insurance on the site, a surety bond in the amount of between $10,000 and $15,000 will be posted prior to the commencement of construction. The contractor liability insurance is in place on behalf of my builder, Homestyle Construction. In addition, I have taken out further liability insurance in the amount of $1,000,000 with Farmers Insurance Company. In regards to the owner -general public liability insurance, I am still researching the availability of said insurance. I have been advised by a number of brokers that the way the ordinance is drafted, insurance cannot be issued. I have discussed this matter with Scott Snyder and he has advised me that pursuant to ECDC 19.05.050(c) the provision for insurance can be waived by you. Given the amount of engineering which has been devoted to this project, together with the engineering report which is being issued for this particular site, I am requesting that the general liability insurance be waived. All the trees have been removed from the site; accordingly, a tree cutting plan is not necessary for the site. In regards to the remaining items on Janine's list, I am relying upon my professionals to provide the information to Janine as soon as possible. My wife and I would like to commence construction on April 1, 1990 and we look forward to your help in obtaining that goal. Thank you for your attention to this matter. If you have any questions, please feel free to call me. Sincerely, LASHER HOLZAPFEL SPE Y & EBBERSON Kevin P. Hanchett KPH/ve cc: Mark McNaughton, Homestyle Construction KPH-LTR\Hahnitr CITY OF EDMONDS 250 STH A%'E ECMCNDS. \Y.A 98020 ::o) 771 _1-2 COMMUNITY SERVICES: Public Works • Planning • Parks ane Recreation • Engineering 8 9 0 - 199 February 20, 1990 Kevin Hanchett 8504 231st Street SW Edmonds, WA 98020 Re: LOT 7 HARBOR HILLS 0 LARRY S. NAUGHTEN MAY04 PETER E. HAHN DIRECTOR The purpose of this letter is to inform you of outstanding requirements for the subject project. Your agent Mark McNaughten, has been informed of these items and has been advised that an initial review is not possible at this time. The City advised Mr. McNaughten to return the application materials to you, but he declined. The following items must be submitted immediately in order to begin an initial review of this application: 1. Architectural plans must be stamped by a licensed architect. 2. An application notice must be posted on -site and a notice of affidavit signed. 3. Architect, engineer, and geo-tech statement is required. 4. Environmental checklist, include tree cutting plan. 5. Topographical map prepared by a licensed surveyor. 6. Drainage and grading plan. 7. Driveway slope profile. 8. The proposed garage encroaches into the required 25-foot setback. 9. North arrow designation on the site plan is required. • Incorporared -august 11. 1S90 - Sister Cities Internaccnal — Hekinan. Japan Kevin Hanchett February 20, 1990 Page Two The following information is required prior to the issuance of the permit: 1. Owner's Liability Statement. 2. Covenant running with the land. 3. Indemnity and Hold Harmless Covenant. 4. Surety Bond must be posted. 5. Contractor's liability insurance. 6. Owner's general public liability insurance. Please contact the Building Division with the required submittals. Thank you, Jeannine L. Graf Permit Coordinator JLG/sfn SUH7FCI I�7 I:J�'' '14111"l�>, . I THE ALL SI1VAll, WASHlNctn� RE-c—=TCT 0Ns AND RESERVATIONS OF RECORD. CI 711 OF E:J�'IONAS , APPROVALS Lt /VIp r tq j4)VED TI s DAY OF � 9. EI%DNDs CITY INEER Me OF SNOHOMISH, STATE OF 1989. EXAMII1ED AND APPROVED 1rIS �_ DAY OF 1989. mum6k.51a 5 :• •. VANNING DIR • - EXAKNM AND APPR= THIS DAY OF ►• r • = jr t• :• it COVENANT IN n-EESE LANDS, AND THE•«a. • -. AND ASSIGNSOF MTERS • • OTHER PAlZrIES HAVINGM• atiT, HEP= AJ= MkT TUEOF alb .• •. SHALL BE HELD HARMLESS IN ALL RESPECTS FROM ANY AND ALL CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES FOR DlJUN=T REI= WHICH MAY BE OCCASIONED NOW OR IN THE FUIURE TO ADJACENT LAND • • DIGWa ON OF 1 coNsTRucrioN,OPERATION AN• f-FJNTEKkNCE OF 1 r.- • D r• e! a AND HER= WAIVE AND RELEASE 1 OF EDHWDS FFCM ANY AND ALL CLADS FOR DAMAGES, EXCLUDING DAMAGE CAUSED SOLELY By AN ACr OR CHISSION OF SAID CITY, AND DUTJNC= Ra= WHICH THE OWNERS, FR THEIR SUCCESSORS OR ASSIGNS, MAY THEMSELVES HAVE NOW OR IN THE FU= BT I•F-ASON OF 1 0ONSTRiCTION,►• • 71 P « OPERATION OF DY • D SYSTEM. ELL-BAUERLAND AND ASSOCIATE8, INC. 19400 33RD /A I. HARBOR I=VL L S LAND SURV�, Iw I F mm CERTIFY THAT = P ' I O N 2 4:,, T. 2 7 N., R. 3 E., W. M. SURVEY AND . SUBDIVISIC N OF W.M. , AS REQ[T= BY SM C I T Y,Y O F E D M O N D S DISTANCES ARE SHOWN Cl0FF ' I,: AND THE IM AND TRACT CCMEP OMISH COUNTY. WASHINGTON SHOWN FfEMN, AND nWIHXV -% AND IDCAL STA'I[TI'ES AND R= NOM \� THE LOTS SHOWN ON THE PLAT LIE WrrHIN AN AREA WHICH HAS STEEP SLOPES AND � WHICH HAS SEEN SUBJECT TO EARM SUBSIDENCE IN THE PAST. AS SUCH, THE LOTS ARE SUHTECT To THE RDQUIREMEMS OF C HAP= 19.05 OF THE FD43NDS OCflMJNITY DEVEIOPMEW CODE. PROSPECTIVE PURCHASERS SHOUID FAMIISARIZE THEMSELVES tLl WIZH THE P.ROCED RkL RDQUIRIImns OF THE CHA=; INF OR1 fATIONAL PACEE'I5 ARE AVAILABLE FRAM THE BUILDING DIVISION OF THE CITY OF EDMONDIS, 505 BELL 4 STREET, EDMl0NDS, iiASHINGPON. tLl N 69" 3a ' ZB' w Sys 50' I TRACT ? 3 0 s„ 7 12,0210 �' ,c' �j I 12,03q \ A 00 .�'��' 12,351 l�> d m -� C �. p•�1, / ,Jo Z r o� �i� SOP l o O 24 o I- p0 "o O p Ir\ v N / so ti 0� �' iti .S 9G. 20 2' F-- 62 , S I a9 . toj .b ,� c a6, �ti cO 'r Q v ollo 25' O _ �. 6 3 O Ot 0�/ �O�U ' ti O�da�� 2 ti m o f '��/ 3 t �� 47 ; 0` J P operty of: �\ GITY OF 'EDMOND --p )MONDS N_ 5947 "NE W ❑ ADDITION ❑ RETIREMENT AS* INFORMATION SHEET �/ ASSET NO. ZITION TO ASSET NO. DESCRIPTION SERIAL NO. LOCATION l / DEr NOG * * PURCHASE ORDER NO. PURCHASE ORDER DATE COST * PROJECT NUMBER PROJECT COMPLETION DATE CL�/k� COST 7 B.A.R.S. ACCOUNT NO. • ESTIMATED LIFE INITIATED BY DATE APPROVED BY "SUBMIT ASSET INFORMATION SHEET WITH FINAL PAYMENT REQUEST *SUBMIT ASSET INFORMATION SHEET UPON CLOSE OF PROJECT ACCOUNTING ONLY DEPRECIATE MONTHLY DEPRECIATION AMOUNT ANNUAL DEPRECIATION AMOUNT G.L. ENTRY REFERENCE DATE b P INITIAL DEPARTMENT FILE (,-I,e VERIFIED BY PROCESSED BATCH NO. CITY OF EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION PERMIT APPLICATION OWNER NAME/NAME OF BUSINESS =V114 P1 c14 ELISA ISG-7A NU,0,ATt� w MAILING ADDRESS " 0 21'12I at 4M :AVV w CITY ZIP TELEPHONE NUMBER D'f-oM" Wig 1P)b24 1 -1?1--4W2,1 ADDRESS CITY ZIP TELEPHONE NUMBER N, ME It ADDRESS -- .�. CITY ZIP TELEPHONE NUMBER U STATE LICENSE NUMBER EXPIRATION DATE Legal Description of Property - include all easements Z L (r, 6Tcc a u 0 J a Property wi am TarAccount r G®O "- ,0ol_ ` ,roo ParcelelNo..1 f ® 1- I NEW RESIDENTIAL PLUMBING ® ADDITION COMMERCIAL MECHANICAL 11 APT. BLDG. " ' REMODEL LJ SIGN G ®RI..FENCE Y� CYDS. REPAIR x—FT) DEMOLISH WOODSTOVE SWIM POOL INSERT HOT TUB/SPA ©GARAGE OARPIGAT © / RENEWAL 2 O .EiR ROCKERY (TYPE OF USE, B kSINESS OR AC IVITY) PLAIN: D,New�✓✓ SM/t�Y E /`iqA1 /Ly �CS I ov >~ AI.✓ %RIOT USEZONE PERMIT NUMBER ADDRESS 9 30535 A SUITE/APT a PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY PER OFFICIAL' STREET MAP. TESCP Approved ❑ EXISTING REOUIRED DEDICATION RW Permit Required Street Use Permit Req'd ❑ ❑ PROPOSED y, Inspection Required lk Sidewalk Required ❑ REMARKS ENO BUILDING S FL - - I SIGN AREA SEPA ALLOWED PROPOSED CO PL/ESEE EXP VARIANCE ORCU 61(A ty le 4f"C PLAtS1NIN9Q11 SETBACKS — FEET FRONT '--Z. _ SIDE /7 REAR Z w ceo 7 0" REVIEW Y73 46(,_ G NO. OF FIXTURES 0 w 3 ll ADS NO. EXEMPT BY QATE C7 O IHT LOT COVERAGE Z g a SPECIAL INSPECTOR AREA OCCUPANCY REOUIRED YES i GROUP J REMARKS PROGRESS INSPECTIONS PER UBC 305 p m0 NUMBER OF STORIES y� IRi, Ci I �% NUMBER OF WELLING UNITS DESCRIBE WORK TO BE DONE (ATTACH PLOT PLAN) FINAL INSPECTION F ;. �• I o I r c I' ScD��s /k'�+AcT ,C3Y ,0 �1,10 (j�Gzsll/�'rlES, STF-Nt TC AaS AYC, Q ^4g- .1Y4F R PLAN CHECK FEE BUILDING HEAT SOURCE: GLAZING % PLUMBING All Plan Check No. t�J ` MECHANICAL This Permit covers work to be done on private property ONLY. oRADING/FILL 10 Any construction on the public domain (curbs, sidewalks, driveways, marquees, etc.) will require separate permission. STATE SURCHARGE Permit Application: 180 Days Permit Limit: 1 Year - Provided Work is Started Within 180 Days STORM DRAINAGE FEE "Applicant, on behalf of his or her spouse, heirs, assigns and ENO. INSPECTION FEE w W m iwhatever 0 o x successors in interest, agrees to indemnify; defend and hold harmless the City of Edmonds, Washington, its officials,Lp employees, and agents from any and all claims for damages of nature, arising directly or Indirectly from the Issuance of this permit. Issuance of this permit shall not be deemed to modify, waive or reduce any requirement of any city ordinance nor limit in any way the City's ability to enforce any ordinance provision." ` /�! PLAN CHECK DEPOSIT TOTAL AMOUNT DUE I hereby acknowledge that I have read this application; that the information given is correct; and that I am the owner, or the duly ATTENTION authorized agent of the owner. I agree to comply with city and THIS PERMIT state laws regulating construction; and in doing the work authoriz- AUTHORIZES ed thereby, no person will be employed in violation of the Labor ONLY THE Code of the State of Washington relating to Workmen's Compensa- WORK NOTED ti n Insurance. INSPECTION SIGNATURE (OWNER OR AGENT) DATE SIGNED DEPARTMENT CITY OF ✓17. t13 EDMONDS OF CALL FOR A TENTIO 1111 n0^11*1^L1 E 'HEIGHT / OCCUPANT LOAD O Z 0 IEQUIRED VALUATION' FEE 13&5- so APPLICATION APPROVAL This application is not a permit until signed by the Building Official,or his/her Deputy; and fees are paid, and receipt is acknowledged in space provided. I IAL•S SIGNATURE OAT �/2� V :AS BY: �q _c� DATE IT IS TO USE OR OCCUPY ABUILD NG RE UNTIL ALFINAL INSPECTION HAS BEEN MADE OR APPROVALUOR 771-0220 ~ ORIGINAL —File YELLOW —Inspector A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY HAS BEEN GRANTED, UBC CHAPTER 3. PINK — Owner GOLD — Assessor 1 W `QC9C+r caw zo z H. owUw Q N w H I AWN E4 xHaw' II . Nwx. - v o E., I �'� CM s w C- ... w>4W"o xo oo i II t � 0 rnH - I C-D U.a . w I N } = W 'x o -.... I 1 { Q AWE-+3ro&' ;V N a o �: •..... I I �, — awaU3o. 'Jim �6 .a ��bM 17ly br/ �,.0. UC7oN.Hp �6i� !-r�N - n 0�7� �i� �j. Sfl�O o�p I // e Q ZLL- _ o Q c' V e N p 3 o N N O , z o .. ?. o L6 p� d L LO W �- � U E � 0 fo Z c� Z H o N O }_ -C) Z N m n 4o a � p 0 lV�� d o 3 o Z. -� m U lLD>. d t NOO[ tn1° c G z m Y c) ? :� p 5 o- v—mil a W = Q LJ NUO' ._ 0- d = o0 e s U)� v u v IZ z 0 _ 3 _ v do�d M -= W I\ \ • 3UA4L)40 aooHz oo: :nEi444W. �# N -- WM,ZwH HZHH.E-i(n II o Ww \X \ o CD