Loading...
1136 VISTA PL.PDF11111111111111 13594 1136 VISTA PL %box oth -J a� P** owt 44, ck sI dt 04 \jcL . P ,4 OWNERICONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE APPROVED FOR EROSION CONTROL AND DAMAGE FIRE DEPARTMENT City of Edmonds wilding Department � A PLAN APPRO VD By P NING �(2 STREET FILE CITY OF EDMONDS BUILDING" DEPARTMENT WORK G prt ADDRESS OWNER APPRC)%'C: U Ct, f E: BLDG. OFFICIAL PERMIT NUMBER OWNER/CONTRACTOR RESPONSIBLE FOR LOCATING ALL ON -SITE UTILITIES. RELOCATIONIREVISION TO ANY UTILITIES MAY REQUIRE SEPARATE PERMIT. �P 1��D �Y ENGINEERING Date: Applicant shall repair/replace all damage to utilities or frortaye improvements in City right=of-wAy per C 4; standards that is cau ed or occur; during the Permitted project. / o1� 5- NOTICE OF DECISION THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS HAS MADE THE FOLLOWING yDETERMINATION: j,� 0�1 `t.. IvV.. ..... �... . .......... .. ...✓ ..... . �4-�./...�� •...���ii�.'. `� . \dam �� ... .. .���-�'�"-.-`.".. .c�..... . D .. . ... ..1©.. ........... ........................ PROPERTY ADDRESS OR DESCRIPTION:....... jj . . .......4�..t,/....i.�.`71` ,.... F I L E# k7" ~-1!� aos,Eo 19 1 ANY PERSON WISHING TO APPEAL THIS DECISION MUST DO SO /IN WRITING, CITING REASONS, TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT B�� � Y. `� WORKING (10 DAYS FROM POSTING DATE) ADDITIONAL INFORMATION IS AVAILABLE FROM THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AT 250 FIFTH AVENUE NORTH. (7/7//?? 39 771-3202 Extension 252 THIS POSTER MAY BE REMOVED AFTER QC�.�.... Cq. 2.0 ........ The removal, mutilation, destruction, or ' concealment of this notice prior to the WARNING date above is a misdemeanor punishable by ■ fine and imprisonment. i��t�d q - i9 8,b 254 E.w.M• N.E. 1 /4, SEC. 24 T.27N, R 3 QJ i 0 14 w 1420 1430 Q p 1427 SVi a c 1916 19516 Q� 1428 1424 1047 m o. V � a 1412 19516 e05 } 1410 4 195w erw 1400 757 7SS CAWADE a cca 797 839 835 831 f 737 } 711 O 1A J tu �I1f, ^ PP M O� T a T T � •� O O O„ O CAROL WAY CARo� AY o 703 1r.. (l'' 70z. � c� P a o Q' o 0 621 603 ' 11 412 M 6oq !1 GLEN S7. qyp� J O o - 52z O 41 I pere�-- 0 S 05 O O in r Ix DAL i T 1 ... N .., v Y yp N P 200 200 10� 10, W" 4DE 0 21 21 ME.MORA.NDUM September 18, 1986 T0; Mary Lou Block, Planning Manager FROM: Leigh Francis, Code Enforcement. Technician SUBJECT: Setback Determination at 1136 Vista Place (A-1.8-86) On August 8, 1.986, Ola Grossett,of Grossett Construction applied. for a building permit to add to an existing .garage on a single. family structure at 1136: Vista. Place in an RS-12 zone. The property is a 45,375 square foot flag lot, at the west end.of Vista Place. Vista Place fronts on 12th Avenue North (see attached map). The existing residence exceeds setback standards of the RS-12 zone. The lot is rectangular, with the. narrow ends on the east'and west sides (both 175 feet long). The longer ends (both 275 feet) are on the north and south; sides: Access is from the east. The front door of the structure faces east. Construction of the requested garage is proposed.on the north side of the house. At present, the house is set back 36 feet from the.north property line. With the proposed addition, 18 feet would remain between the structure and the :north property line. If this side of the lot was considered the front property line, the addition could not be approved_, as it would encroach into the 25-foot setback. The logical setbacks are as follows: street or front'(east) setback. 25 feet; rear (west) setback = 25 feet; and side (north and south) setbacks = 10 feet. Determination of setbacks as suggested and subsequent construction as proposed will not impair vehiclemaneuvering space,, and will not i.mpair Views from nearby residences. I have visited the subject property and believe that no negative impacts will result from construction of the proposed addition according to the specified setbacks. If you concur with my decision, please indicate your concurrence in the space below: Concurrence: . "�� 'v���� eigh Francis Mary Lou Block I CITY.OF ED'MONDS 250 51h AVE. N. • EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 98020 • (206)'771.3202 COMMUNITY SERVICES DATE: September 19, 1986 TO: O1 a Grossett 931-12th Ave. N. Edmonds, WA 98020 LARRY S. NAUGHTEN MAYOR PETER E. HAHN DIRECTOR TRANSMITTING: NOTICE. OF DECISION REGARDING SETBACK DETERMINATION AT 1136 VISTA PLACE (FILE #A-18-86). .AS YOU REQUESTED: FOR YOUR INFORMATION: XXX AS WE DISCUSSED: FOR APPROVAL FOR YOUR FILE: XXX REVIEW AND COMMENT COMMENT AND RETURN: MINUTES OF MEETING: REMARKS: PLANNING DIVISION Susan Painter PUBLIC WORKS • PLANNING • PARKS AND RF(;RFATION • FNC;INFFRINr. City of Edmonds Critical Area Notice of Decision Applicant: r Property Owner: or Critical Area File #: �4 0 0 00 O Permit Number: /��-D Z D Z Site Location: 3 s se A Parcel Number: oo5-ga10(goo zzo1 Project Description: f-Conditional Waiver. No critical area report is required for the project described above. 1. There will be, no alteration of a Critical Area or its required buffer. 2. The proposal is an allowed activity pursuant to ECDC 23.40.220, 23,50.220, and/or 23.80.040. 3. The proposal is exempt pursuant to ECDC 23.40.230. ❑ Erosion Hazard. Project is within erosion hazard area. Applicant must prepare an erosion and sediment control plan in compliance with ECDC 18.30. ❑ Critical Area Report Required: The proposed project is within a critical area and/or a critical area buffer and a critical area report is required. A critical area report has been submitted and evaluated for compliance with the following criteria pursuant to ECDC 23.40.160: 1. The proposal minimizes the impact on critical areas in accordance with ECDC 23.40:120, Mitigation sequencing; 2. The proposal does not pose an unreasonable threat to the public health, safety, or welfare on or off the development proposal site; 3. The proposal is consistent with the general purposes of this title and the public interest; 4. Any alterations permitted to the critical area are mitigated in accordance with ECDC 23.40.110, Mitigation requirements. 5. The proposal protects the critical area functions and values consistent with the best available science and results in no net loss of critical functions and values; and 6. The proposal is consistent with other applicable regulations and standards. ❑ Unfavorable Critical Area Decision. The proposed project is not exempt or does not adequately mitigate its impacts on critical areas and/or does not comply with the criteria in ECDC 23.40.1.60 and the provisions of the City of Edmonds critical area regulations. See attached findings of noncompliance. Favorable Critical Area Decision. The proposed project as described above and as shown on the attached site plan meets or is exempt from the criteria in ECDC 23.40.160, Review Criteria, and complies with the applicable provisions of the City of Edmonds critical area regulations. Any subsequent changes to the proposal shall void this decision pending re -review of the proposal. ❑ Conditions. Critical Area specific condition(s) have been applied to the permit number referenced above. See referenced permit number for specific condition(s). //�' Cttl7f ('O(\ Reviewer e-A 441� Signature Z 12 Date Appeals: Any decision to approve, condition, or deny a development proposal or other activity based on the requirements of critical area regulations may be appealed according to, and as part of, the appeal procedure, if any, for the permit or approval involved. Revised 12/16/2010 a J.R. Kallstrom / Resident 1121 Vista Place Edmonds, WA 98020 Gerald Ward P.O. Box 689 Edmonds, WA 98020 Gerald Ward / Resident P.O. Box 689 1125 Vista Place Edmonds,'WA 98020 Richard Bader/Resident 835 12th Ave. N. Edmonds, WA 98020 City Federal Savings & Loan Cooch, James L. #918463-5 125 Belmont Dr. Somerset, NJ 08873 James Cooch/Resident,. 1139 Vista Place Edmonds, WA 98020 Robert Burton/Resident 911-12th Ave. N. Edmonds, WA 98020 Bjorn Nymark/Resident 1136 Vista Place Edmonds, WA 98020 Bernard Schuster/Resident 1120 Vista Place Edmonds, WA 98020 Everett Federal S&L Hirakawa, V. #1-6500-10443-6 1502 Wall Everett, WA 98201 V. Hirakawa/Resident. 1116 Vista Place Edmonds, WA 98020 Henning Nelson/Resident 1142 Vista Place Edmonds, WA 98020 Manuel & Ida Fernandez/ Resident 1133 Sierra Place Edmonds, WA 98020 Aage & Anna Sjoholm/Resident 1135 Sierra Place Edmonds., WA 98020 Mary A. Knudson/Resident 901-12th Ave. N. Edmonds, WA 98020 Shoreline Savings Grube, Claie L. #0757000051 P.O. Box 25788 Seattle, WA 98125 Claie Grube/Resident 821-12th Ave. N. Edmonds, WA 98020 Louise Riley / Resident 811.-12th Ave. N. Edmonds, WA 98020 Samuel McKinstry/Resident 801-12th Ave. N. Edmonds, WA 98020 Antoine Tachdjian c/o Sam Salibian 17230-S.E. 40th Ct. Bellevue, WA 98008 Antoine Tachdjian/Resident 719-12th Ave. N. Edmonds, WA 98020 Ola Grossett Grossett Construction 931-12th Ave. N. Edmonds, WA 98020 FILE NO. A- 18.- 86' APPLICANT Bjorm Nymark AFFIDAVIT OF POSTER STATE OF WASHINGTON ), ss. COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH. ) Leigh Francis being first duly sworn, on oath, deposes and says: That on the, 19th day of September 19 86 , the attached Notice of Decisio.n was posted as. Prescribed by Ord ' inance:, and in any event,, in the Frances Anderson Center and Civicl Center, and where, applicable on or near the subject property-. Signed Subscribed and sworn to before me this, day of '�Lvzl 19 y i. -4 Notary Publicin, and for the State of Washington. Residing at MY COMMISSION EXPIRES 6. Knot N. Stave P.E. 11 maison Vule iWO2 1740 Melrose Avenue _7 ge qut* WA 93 22 Ye e, CISTt N L JOB NAME- JOB # LOCATION. PIP"d Vpj 7' 1 SHEET OF SALESMAN: a7- BY DATE: la i .-ILICATION CARD No. ......... ............ .......... for The City of Edmonds SIDE SEWER PERK OUTSIDE 0 INSIDE 0 REPAIRS 0 EASEMENT No. . ........................ ......... iz-1 I (t V I q 0 0/4"90 ............. .......................................... I ...... OWNER ....... f? ....... .......... C 4 4u /V.C- CONTRACTOR .......... i .............. ... ... ... ............................................. - ................ PERMIT No. STREET No. .......... .......... bt ................. I ....... I .............. AVENUE LOT No .........No................... .......... .............................. HOUSE ........... .......... BLOCK NAMEADD ................................................. - .............................................. I ............................ .............................................. 6 ..A�� 0 -, - ? L, Date Approved: BACKFILL WORK ORDER ISSUED ........................................... DEPOSIT, ............. A SEWER WORK ORDER ISSUED ..... ........ ................. ........ DATE.........:.. ... ......... BY ......... /Pws ukja�� A , Hou .............. .................... I c STREET FILE STATE OF WASHINGTON) COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH ,} I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that 10 r n �� t! v►1! VCR r ryl� = i+_d r►� a v �c G-v�ee ibl vL Dre" is the pe of j s ho appeared before me, ands pefson acknowledged that (he/sheWey))ignedthis instrument and acknowledged to be (his/he eir) � ee and voluntary act for the uses rposes mentioned in the instrument. n/q� arP�i• Llnv* j l % 7-613 i r��11111111f///��t 1�,{X 1X �� CHR � �'�".•• gS10N F,+A, E',ysie Notary. in and or the state of�Washington, r►''�� residing at t7ejM a,c Q h r A M, ar r %%a T! ^ j. ; _ My commission/appointment expires N: %A `111411111/// ' �� �• �CHR O� i��� `LoO�� $: g..ION >/ems � A 00801 a: Z10 *W 1 v A.F.M. Industries, Inc. (Professional Land Surveying and Planning) 2026 MADISON ST.. (425) 425-353-8950 - office EVERETT, WA. 98203 (425) 425-353-6859 - fax DATE: MAR. 30, 2001 i-(;= LLEREN/DRYER LEGAL DESCRIPTION — REVISED INGRESS, EGRESS & UTIL. EASEMENT AN EASEMENT FOR INGRESS, EGRESS & UTILITIES, OVER UNDER AND ACROSS A PORTION OF THE NORTH 165.00 FEET OF TRACT 22, PUGET SOUND MACHINERY DEPOT FIVE ACRE TRACTS, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF, RECORDED IN VOLUME 5 OF PLATS, PAGE 47, RECORDS OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON. LESS THE WEST 380 FEET THEREOF, SAID EASEMENT MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED TRACT OF LAND; THENCE SOUTH 000 09' 46" WEST ALONG THE WEST LINE THEREOF A DISTANCE OF 10.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING SOUTH 000 09' 46" WEST ALONG SAID WEST LINE A DISTANCE OF 15.84 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 890 34' 28" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 6.36 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 040 58' 01" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 98.75 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 000 25' 32" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 40.74 FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED TRACT OF LAND; THENCE SOUTH 890 34' 28" EAST ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE A DISTANCE OF 225.76 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED TRACT OF LAND; . THENCE NORTH 000 10' 53" WEST ALONG THE EAST LINE OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED TRACT OF LAND A DISTANCE OF 10.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 890 34' 28" WEST PARALLEL TO SAID SOUTH LINE A DISTANCE OF 112.88 FEET; THENCE NORTH 850 11' 53" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 66.28 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT HAVING A RADIUS OF 35.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 80013' 52" AND HAVING AN ARC LENGTH OF 49.01 FEET; THENCE NORTH 040 58' 01"' WEST, A DISTANCE OF 108.71 FEET TO A POINT 10.00 FEET SOUTH OF THE NORTH LINE OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED TRACT OF LAND; THENCE NORTH 890 34' 29" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 20.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. SITUATE IN THE'qOUNTv OF SNOHOMISH, STATE OF WASHINGTON. -10' EASEMENT A.F. #815306 r— 10' EASEMENT A.F. #815307 pp 713 � 00 1 .:S89'34'2,8"E 20.00 589'34'28'E 6.36' TRACT 21 TRACT 22 o 00' o' EX. 20' ESM'T \\a/ A.F. # 1444635 \G�' �\l W N , ::,: 5 p to G 00 CLy I I Q w I3 Delta= o 80'13'S2 {\�' Lu 3 �N t, R=35:00 0 o L=49.01 0 --N85'11'SZ� 23 66.28' _ _-�N89'34'28'W 225.76' EX. 10' ASPH. N89'34'28 "W ' DRIVEWAY I EX., 10' ESM'T , A.F. # 1444 5 ' 24 I I 1 25 GRAPHIC SCALE 50 0 25 50 100 200 l ( IN FEET) 1 inch = 50 ft. l } Q Q TRA CT 2 3 cn -------------------------------------- SIERRA STREET --------------------------------� I FO < 21110ON sv dV -7 aQ o +law 4FA =-7A 4 (7a5= A4 R-DH F7 IN Us I X'�El 'x, W, Y w Zipper Geo Associates, LLC Geotechnical and Environmental Consulting Mark Langford 1136 Vista Place Edmonds, WA 98020 Subject: Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation of Planned Landscaping Dear Mr. Langford, Project 1470.00 May 1, 2015 This letter summarizes my findings from an inspection of your property on April 28, 2015 and review of a Landscape Plan by Cramer Design Consultants, Inc. dated March 16, 2015. These engineering services were authorized by a Consulting Services Agreement dated April 28, 2015. The scope of work was limited to observation of surface conditions, review of data and submittal of these findings. Background It is my understanding that regulated Critical Areas (Erosion Hazard, Steep Slope and Landslide Hazard) are present on the parcel as described in the City of Edmonds Critical Areas report dated January 21, 2010. This report addresses impacts of the planned development as shown on the referenced Landscape Plan on these Critical Areas. Feasibility -level assessments of a possible retaining wall across the existing driveway in the south part of the property and possible terracing of the existing west -facing slope above the driveway on the west side of the parcel are also addressed within this report. Site Inspection and Data Review Findings I inspected your property on April 28, 2015. The location of the planned landscaping wall located south and southeast oof the house was recently cleared of shrubs. There was no evidence of instability or erosion in this area. -The existing retaining walls located below the planned landscape wall appear to be functioning as intended, but detailed evaluation of stability of these existing walls was not undertaken. The data reviewed for this evaluation included a boring log at the pool location west of the house on the subject property, dated 1991 by Cascade Geotechnical. The boring encountered a limited depth of fill overlying dense glacial till. Other boring logs several hundred feet north of the subject property encountered similar conditions. 19023 36t^ Avenue West, Suite D Lynnwood, WA 98036 (425) 582-9928 Zipper Geo Associates, LLC 1136 Vista Place, Edmonds, WA Project No. 1470.00 May 1, 2015 Page 2 Topographic conditions are illustrated on the enclosure with this letter, which was reproduced from City of Edmonds mapping. Conclusions: Planned Landscapinq The planned landscape wall located south and southeast of the house will be limited to a 36-inch height, and will be set back 8 to 9 feet from the existing wall below it, according to the plans. Provided that this setback is maintained and provided that the new wall is founded on undisturbed native soils, the wall location and configuration appear stable. The planned construction will have, no effect on the nearby Landslide Hazard or Steep Slope Critical Areas, based on topographic and geologic conditions at the site. It is recommended that City -required best practices be followed for erosion control during construction. It is also recommended that wall construction follow manufacturer's guidelines, and that a perforated drain pipe be installed behind the base of the wall as typically required for this type of construction. Based on the information reviewed, the risk of damage to the proposed development, or to adjacent properties, from soil instability is minimal subject to the conditions set forth in this report developed under the requirements of ECDC 19.10.030 and the proposed development will not increase the potential for soil movement. Feasibility: Planned Retaining Wall and Terracinq The possible retaining wall located across the existing driveway cut, southeast of the house, appears feasible using a variety of wall types. The planned use of Ultra blocks is feasible, with terraced walls separated by a planted terrace. Due to the planned height of the wall, structural and stability calculations and plans will be required for permitting. In general, stable soils are expected below the driveway pavement, providing a stable base and adequate bearing capacity for a properly engineered wall structure. Subsurface drainage will be needed behind the base of the wall. This planned construction will have no effect on adjacent Critical Areas, based on topographic and geologic conditions at the site. Terracing the slope west of the pool area can be completed without compromising the stability of the slope. In general, stability will be improved by starting with a stable wall at the base of slope, founded on stable native soils and designed to support surcharges form upper terraces. The lower wall can use a variety of wall types, including Ultra Blocks. 19023 361h Avenue West, Suite D Lynnwood, WA 98036 (425) 582-9928 Zipper Geo Associates, LLC 1136 Vista Place, Edmonds, WA Project No. 1470.00 May 1, 2015 Page 3 We appreciate the opportunity to provide these services and are available to provide assistance with design of repairs. If you have any questions or comments, please call me at (425) 478-7748. Sincerely, Zipper Geo Associates, LLC a E. John E. Zipper, P.E. Managing Principal Enclosures: Excerpt from City of Edmonds Topographic mapping 19023 36th Avenue West, Suite D Lynnwood, WA 98036 (425) 582-9928 Zipper Geo Associates, LLC Geotechnical and Environmental Consulting Topography of subject property and vicinity 1136 Vista Place, Edmonds WA Source: City of Edmonds mapping Approx. scale 1" = 100' �, CASCADE GEOTECHNICAL INC. 12016115TH AVENUE N.E., BLDG. H (206) 821-5080 ' KIRKLAND, WASHINGTON 98034 FAX: (206) 820-6953 October 14, 1991 Job No. 9110-01G Groset Construction Co. 931 12th Avenue North ' Edmonds, Washington 98020 113GViJb+V44 Attention: Ola Groset Reference: Preliminary Geotechnical Study Nymark Pool T't7 1136 Vista Place T Fet 'e Edmonds, Washington Dear Mr. Groset: At your request, we have conducted a preliminary geotechnical study at the above site. The following report summarizes our field observations and presents our conclusions and preliminary recommendations. ' Based on our conversations with you and as shown on plans provided to us, we understand the project will consist of the construction ' of an in -ground swimming pool, located between the existing single family residence and the relatively steep slope west of the house. tSeptember The plans provided to us were a Plot Plan by Dave A. Hermans dated 1, 1991, and 42 Inch Wall Swimming Pool Standards by Glenn Consultants, Inc. dated July 14, 1988. At this time, no topographic information is available. ' SCOPE ' The scope of our study was to view the surface and subsurface soil and ground water conditions in the location of the proposed pool, to address slope stability and the effect of the pool excavation on the existing house, and to provide specific recommendations for grading, retaining wall design, drainage and erosion control. CASCADE GEOTECHNICAL INC. October 14, 1991 Groset Construction ' Job No. 9110-01G Page 2 Our fieldwork consisted of a visual reconnaissance of the proposed pool location and the slope, and the drilling of one (1) test boring. A portable, hollow -stem auger drill rig was used to ' advance the test borings. Samples were obtained from selected depths in accordance with ASTM D-1586 sampling procedures. The test boring location was determined in the field by our ' engineering geologist and was located on -site by measuring to known landmarks. The soil samples obtained from the test boring were ' described in the field and were classified using the Unified Soils Classification System. The test boring locations are shown on the site plan in Appendix A. The test boring logs and soil ' descriptions are presented in Appendix B. A copy of the Unified Soils Classification System is presented in Appendix C. All ' elevations mentioned in this report are referenced to the existing grade at the time of our field investigation. 1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION As shown on the plans, the project will consist of the construction ' of a thirty-six (36) foot long, eighteen (18) foot wide (maximum width northern end), kidney shaped, vinyl lined, in -ground swimming pool (the Plot Plan indicates a 34' X 16' kidney shaped pool). The ' proposed pool location is a flat yard area between the existing house and a relatively steep slope located west of the house. The pool will have a maximum depth of about eight (8) feet in the ' northern end and will be about three (3) feet deep in the southern end. The upper three (3) feet or so of the pool sidewall will be vertical. Below the upper. three ( 3 ) feet, the pool sides slope down to the flat pool bottom at about 45 degrees. IThe pool will be surrounded by a concrete patio. As shown on the 11 � CASCADE GEOTECHNICAL INC. October 14 1991 Groset Construction ' Job No. 9110-01G Page 3 Plot Plan, the western edge of the patio along the western side of the pool will be supported by a forty-six (46) inch tall retaining ' wall. At the closest point, the retaining wall will be about four (4) feet from the side of the pool. _1 L SITE DESCRIPTION The site is located at the eastern end of Vista Place between 12th Avenue North and Olympic Avenue in Edmonds, Washington. An ' existing single family residence is located on the upper, relatively flat east side of the property. The western portion of the property slopes down to the west to a paved driveway which runs north -south and parallel to the toe of the slope. We estimated the total height of the steep slope to be about twenty-five (25) to thirty (30) feet. The upper twelve (12) feet of the slope was estimated to be inclined at about 75 percent. Below that, the slope flattens out to an inclination we estimated ' to be about 50 percent. ' The slope is mostly vegetated with short grass with some young blackberry bushes. Several mature, straight cedar trees were growing near the toe of the slope in the southern portion, and a ' large maple tree was near the top of the slope in the northern portion. No evidence of significant erosion or instability were noted on the ' slope. No ground water seepage was noted on the slope; however, horse tails were growing at the toe of the slope adjacent to the ' paved driveway. The presence of the horse tails suggests wet soils conditions in that location. IThe proposed pool location is a flat lawn located between the top 1 CASCADE GEOTECHNICAL INC. ' October 14, 1991 Groset Construction ' Job No. 9110-01G Page 4 ' of the slope and the house. The distance between the house and the top of the slope is about thirty (30) feet at the northern end of ' the pool location and about twenty-five (25) feet at the southern end of the pool location. H �I 1 1 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS The subsurface soil and ground water conditions were observed in a test boring approximately six (6) feet east of the top of the slope and about halfway between the north and south ends of the proposed pool. The test boring showed approximately five (5) feet of uncontrolled fill overlying native, coarse sand and silty sand with gravel. The test boring was terminated at a depth of eleven (11) feet below the existing surface due to very hard drilling within the silty sand with gravel. The uncontrolled fill consisted of firm, dry, gray -brown silty sand with gravel and a trace of organic material (burned wood). Based on the site topography, it is reasonable to assume that the thickness of the fill decreases to the east of our test boring. Below the fill we found brown, medium dense to dense, coarse grained sand overlying dense to very dense, silty sand with varying amounts of gravel. The very dense silty sand with gravel appeared to be a glacial till. The soils in this area are mapped as Vashon Advance Outwash and Vashon Till. The native soils we observed below the uncontrolled fill in our test boring appear to be consistent with the 'Minard, 1983, Geologic Map of the Edmonds East and Part of the Edmonds West Quadrangle, Washington: U.S.G.S. Geologic Map MF- 1541, Scale 1:24,000. 1 CASCADE GEOTECHNICAL INC. ' October 14 1991 c r , Groset Construction ' Job No. 9110-01G Page 5 ' classification of Vashon Till. No ground water was encountered in the test boring. ICONCLUSIONS AND PRELIMINARY RECOMMENDATIONS ' It appears that the site can be made suitable for the proposed pool if our recommendations are carefully followed. Based on our field observations, reasonable assumed soils parameters and computer analysis of the slope stability factor of safety, it is our ' conclusion that the slope is stable in its present configuration. ' The uncontrolled fill found at the top of the slope is not suitable for supporting structural loads or resisting significant lateral forces. The pool and retaining wall should be supported by the ' native bearing soil found below the uncontrolled fill. The excavation for the pool and the. retaining wall would be expected to remove the majority of the uncontrolled fill from the top of the slope. ' Due to the thickness of the uncontrolled fill found at the top of ' the slope, it appears that the retaining wall will have to be much higher than the forty-six (46) inch high wall shown on the Plot Plan. We recommend preparing a topographic map of the site to ' assist in the planning and final design of the retaining wall. Detailed and specific recommendations and design will be required to avoid adversely affecting the present stability. Specific recommendations for design and development are presented below. Slope Stability Dense to very dense glacial till was found below the uncontrolled ' fill in our test boring at the top of the slope. Glacial till in 1 CASCADE GEOTECHNICAL INC. ' October 14 1991 Groset Construction Job No. 9110-01G Page 6 this region generally exhibits excellent slope stability characteristics if ground water and erosion are adequately ' controlled. No evidence of slope movement, significant erosion or significant ground water seepage were noted on the slope face at the time of our fieldwork. We have conducted a preliminary slope stability analysis using a ' Simplified Bishop method of analysis on a computer program designed for this purpose. We used soil parameters based on our experience and our site investigation. No topographic information for the slope is available at this time; therefore, preliminary estimates ' of the slope inclination were made by the Cascade Geotechnical, Inc. representative by measuring with a tape. We recommend that a topographic map of the site be prepared and provided to us for ' review to verify our preliminary analysis. ' Based on our preliminary slope stability analysis, our visual reconnaissance of the slope, the native soils we encountered on the slope, and assuming our recommendations are followed, we feel that the stability of the slope will not be adversely affected during or ' after the construction of the proposed pool and retaining wall. It should be noted that if our recommendations are carefully ' followed, the completed pool will produce a more stable slope condition than that which existed previously, where the top of the ' slope was loaded by uncontrolled fill. The expected stability of the slope after construction could decrease if the pool is not adequately maintained, if pool drainage ' is not adequately controlled, if significant erosion occurs on the slope face or if the uncontrolled fill at the top of the slope is not structurally supported or removed. CASCADE GEOTECHNICAL INC. ' October 14 1991 Groset Construction ' Job No. 9110-01G Page 7 I Effect of Pool Excavation on the Existing House ' Based on our subsurface information, the dimensions of the proposed pool and our understanding of the proposed pool location, it is our conclusion that the excavation for the pool will not adversely impact the stability of the house foundation. It is our understanding that the pool will be no closer than six (6) feet to ' the house. We should review any configuration differing from this to provide additional or alternate recommendations. Our conclusions assume that the house footings are at least eighteen (18) inches below the ground surface and are resting on firm, glacially consolidated soils. We did not perform a field investigation to verify this. Grading and Erosion Control The on -site soils found in the proposed pool location are moisture sensitive. Therefore, we recommend that all earthwork take place during dry weather. Wet weather construction may affect the stability of the slope in addition to incurring excessive costs and construction difficulty. All vegetation, topsoil and uncontrolled fill should be removed from both the proposed pool and retaining wall areas. All material. includina native soil. excavated from those areas should be removed from the site. We strongly recommend against placing any fill on or near the slope, or stockpiling excavated soils near the slope. If excavated material is removed via the driveway below, it should be contained in transit, and not allowed on the slope. Existing vegetation outside of the proposed building area should remain undisturbed wherever possible. CASCADE GEOTECHNICAL INC. 1 October 14, 1991 Groset Construction Job No. 9110-01G Page 8 We recommend that vertical construction cuts into the very dense, native silty sand with gravel for footing excavations not exceed four (4) feet in height. Cuts into the very dense sand over four (4) feet in height should be sloped back to 1(H):1(V) or flatter, or should be supported with shoring. We recommend that we be engaged to observe these operations. Temporary construction drains should be used to direct all surface water away from the excavation. All bare, sloping ground should be covered with plastic sheeting during periods of inactivity. The plastic sheeting should be anchored with stakes on the perimeter, and weighted down with sand bags within the interior. A silt fence or hay bales should be placed along the downhill side of the excavation.. All temporary erosion measures should -conform to City of Edmonds requirements. Preliminary Retaining Wall Design Based on our conversations with Ola Groset and our review of the Plot Plan, we understand that the proposed retaining wall will be constructed of reinforced concrete. The retaining wall footing should be placed on a horizontal bench ' excavated into the native, dense to very dense silty sand with gravel. The native, dense to very dense silty sand with gravel ' found below the uncontrolled fill is suitable for supporting strip footings designed to 2000 psf (pounds per square foot) if the soil ' is undisturbed, free of organic material, and does not become wet prior to concrete placement. ' Foundation elevations should be adjusted to avoid local overloading of the slope. We recommend that the outside edge of the retaining iwall footing be placed at least two (2) feet back laterally from 1 CASCADE GEOTECHNICAL INC. ' October 14, 1991 Groset Construction ' Job No. 9110-01G Page 9 ' the outer edge of the horizontal bench on which it's placed. We recommend that we be engaged to review final plans and to be on site during the excavation to confirm that the,excavation is done ' in such a manner as to minimize any adverse effects on the slope stability. We also recommend that we be engaged to view the footing excavation prior to placing the forms to confirm bearing soil and subgrade conditions. The retaining wall footing should be placed at least eighteen (18) inches below the outside finished grade for frost protection. The minimum footing widths should conform to the local building codes. ' The retaining wall should be backfilled with a "free draining" granular soil which conforms to the specifications presented below: Sieve Size Percent Passing ' 4 inch 100 ' #4 25 - 75 #200 5.0 maximum. Based on the fraction passing the. #4 sieve. Wall backfill should be placed in twelve (12) inch maximum loose lifts, and should be mechanically compacted. We recommend using lightweight, hand operated equipment when compacting within four (4) feet of the walls. A continuous drain should be placed along the interior base of the retaining wall and should be tightlined to a suitable drainage ' outlet. The drain should consist of a four (4) inch diameter, perforated PVC pipe that is bedded in several inches of pea gravel ' and is backfilled with at least twelve (12) inches of pea gravel. 1 CASCADE GEOTECHNICAL INC. October 14, 1991 Groset Construction Job No. 9110-01G Page 10 The drain pipe shall not be allowed to direct water to the top of the slope or onto the slope face. At this time, we do not know the exact location of the retaining wall in relation to the pool. With the proposed pool type, it is possible that lateral pressure exerted on the sides of the pool, from the water in the pool, could influence the active force the retaining wall must resist. In order to accurately analyze the active force on the wall, this distance must be known. However, we are providing a preliminary active pressure based on an estimated worst case scenario. Walls which are backfilled in conformance with the above gradation and are provided with the recommended drainage may be designed using the following lateral forces: Active Pressure - Wall Free To Deflect .001H During Backfilling • 70 pcf (pounds per cubic foot) equivalent fluid pressure. Passive Pressure • 450 pcf equivalent fluid pressure (May be reduced after detailed location is established to reflect proximity to the slope). ' The above values assume a horizontal grade behind the top of the wall, with no significant surcharge. Drainage The generic swimming pool design plans provided to us indicate that the patio surrounding the pool will slope away from the edge of the CASCADE GEOTECHNICAL INC. October 14, 1991 Groset Construction ' Job No. 9110-01G Page 11 ' pool. We recommend placing a curb or gutter on the outer edge of the patio to direct splash runoff into a drain pipe which is tightlined to a suitable drainage outlet. We recommend against routing any water to the top of the slope or onto the slope face. All other pool drains should be tightlined to a suitable drainage outlet. We recommend using rigid PVC pipe for all drains and tightlines. General We recommend that we be engaged to review the final plans to confirm that our preliminary recommendations have been properly interpreted, to verify our preliminary recommendations and to provide additional or alternate recommendations. We recommend that ' we be engaged to provide continuous observation of the excavation for the pool and the retaining wall to verify subgrade conditions, ' confirm bearing soils and monitor temporary cut stability. We recommend that we be engaged to observe the placement of the wall ' drainage and backfill. These are for engineering review, and go beyond any testing agency involvement which may be required. We expect the on -site soil and ground water conditions to reflect our findings; however, some variations may occur. Should soil ' conditions be encountered that cause concern and/or are not discussed herein, we recommend that we be contacted immediately to ' determine if additional or alternate recommendations are required. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Groset Construction for the specific application to the proposed swimming ' pool and retaining wall located at 1136 Vista Place in Edmonds, Washington, in accordance with generally accepted soil and foundation engineering practices. No other warranty, expressed or ' implied, is made. CASCADE GEOTECHNICAL INC. October 14, 1991 Groset Construction Job No. 9110-01G Page 12 Thank you for this opportunity to be of service to you. Should you have any questions, feel free to contact us at any time. Sincerely, CASCADE GEOTECHNI George E. President John Sadler Engineering Geologist NYMARK POOL TEST BORING LOCATION SKETCH a w U) 0 a dw O Qcc 0 J N W Xa w O O aO Qa H w U) O 2 CDDOWN Z T.6.1 X w Job No. Scale • 9110-01 G NOT TO SCALE CASCADE GEOTECHNICAL INC.-- 12016 115TH AVENUE N.E., BLDG. H (206)821-5080 LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE KIRKLAND, WASHINGTON 98034 FAX: (206) 820-6953 Date 10/01 /91 Dnrn.Ely HLA Eng-GSaol __.) 7 Cl 1 Project, Job No. 9110-01 G Date 10/01 /91 NYMARK POOL Boring No. 1 Dwn.By HLA Driller DRILLING UNLIMITED Drill Type ACKER SOIL MECHANIC Geo/Eng J. SADLER Hole Dia. 2.5" I.D. Fluid > Penetration a� a Soil Description & Classification Notes w a o $ cn 0 0 cn m in I5 5 7 12 Brownish gray silty sand with gravel, trace organics, dry. (FILL) 5 Dark gray to light gray silty sand with gravel, trace organics (roots, I1 2 2 4 burned wood). (FILL) appeared to be contact between fill and native soil at 6' 8 10 15 25 i�' =i; SAND: coarse- grained, gray to gray -brown, dense, wet. (SP) I SILTY SAND; gray -brown, medium dense to dense, damp to moist, 10 with some gravel. (SM) coarse sand wet from water added to hole I 10 37 - 37 SILTY SAND: gray, very dense, damp to moist, with some gravel. (SM) (till) very hard drilling T.D. = 11.0' 15 20 25 30" Notes: No ground water encountered. *At 5'- 6.5' and 7.5'- 9' water was poured down hole to assist drilling. 1 " diameter rounded gravel lodged in sampler tip (12' recovery). Terminated due to very hard drilling. Conditions shown represent our observations at the time and location of the field work, modifications based on lab tests, analysis, and geological and engineering judgement. These conditions may not exist at other times and locations, even in close proximity. This information was gathered as part of our investigation, and we are not responsible for any rise or interpretation of the information by others. - CASCADE GEOTECHNICAL, INC. TEST BORING LOG Page 1 of 1 September 19, 1972 Mr. George 0. Cooper 1136 Vista Place Edmonds, Washington 98020 Re: Utility Account No. 120-)1590 1136 Vista Place, Edmonds, Wash. Dear 1,1r. Cooper - It has come to our attention +h--+, although, you have a private water system servicing your residence, you are hooked up to the City of Edmonds sewer system. In checking our records, we find that we have not been billing you a Utility Charge. For your information*'enclosed is a copy of Section 6.20.030 of the Edmonds City Code. We have underlined in red that portion that pertains to your situation. At your earliest convenience, we would appreciate you contacting the Utility Billing office regarding this charge; as per the ordinance, you will be receiving this 'billing in the future. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely, CITY'OF EDMONDS J. HERE GILSO Director JHG:ch Enclosure FILE UNIFIED SOILS CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM MAJOR DIVISIONS SYMBOL LETTER DESCRIPTION ° °°oo.A°°a, GW Well - graded gravels or gravel - sand mixtures, CLEAN °o°'o°°;o' little or no fines GRAVEL & GRAVELS C' P Poorly graded gravels or gravel -sand mixtures, ili►ydi«ya, little or no fines GRAVELLY GRAVELS ; • GM Silty gravels or gravel -sand-silt mixtures SOILS WITH FINES COARSE GC Clayey gravels or gravel -sand -clay mixtures GRAINED ° o0 o ° 00 0 ° ° 0 0 SOILS $W Well -graded sands or gravelly sands, little or CLEAN o 00 o°Oe o no fines SAND & SANDS $ P Poorly graded sands or gravelly sands, little or no fines SANDY SOILS SM Silty sands or sand -silt mixtures SANDS WITH FINES $ C Clayey sands or sand -clay mixtures Inorganic silts & very fine sands, rock flour. silty ML or clayey fine sands, or clayey silts with slight SILTS & CLAYS plasticity CL Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity, gravelly clays, sandy clays, silty clays or lean clays Liquid Limit Less Than 50 I I i I I I I Organic silts & organic silty clays of low FINE I I I I I I OL i I Illltll i I I I plasticity GRAINED MH Inorganic silts, micaceous or diatomaceous fine SOILS SILTS & CLAYS sandy or silty soils, elastic silts CH Inorganic clays of high plasticity, tat clays Liquid Limit Greater Than 50 clays of medium to high plasticity, g OHOrganic organic silts HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT Peat or other highly organic soils u_ ..._ TOPSOIL Humus & duff layer FILL Uncontrolled, with highly variable constituents Y SOL DATUM NOTE I2"O.D. Split Spoon Sampler Sample Interval fRing or Shelby Sampler Sample Interval PSampler Pushed Sample Interval >}C Other Sample Type Sample Interval eo l DATUM NOTE SZWater Level Date Recorded T$ Torvane Reading I qu Penetrometer Reading Water Observation Well Tip Elevation CASCADE GEOTECHNICAL, INC. KEY CHART 14 P - Ze, .7- man F 1__V11 I char es e n 'e . e I Y The utility se 0 1 t 2 6 0 'month1Vy*- kl%pe, adde pqnth�-'y to and for'e, S�� made.a part Y' ra -fti6r water b the meters as herein- 6r COP:A NO T' NNECTED CONNECTED Resjd6ncej,-s11n9le $2.0 'per. fam I month,�­ I Y*jo-duple$3.,00'per month per unit a uni per. t part mpilt.; h6us e s and other multiple units A`,excep,t hotels tourist -camps r. trailer park s and motels. (b) Hotels A .$3.00 Plus 0 us $-50 each room. ,tar e c �'T urlst� c6ur�sl o t e 1 s,. trailer 3 0 0 Pl*us $1.05 each unl. _�arks (d) Schoo' .4 .js. 2P,j e Min., mr, U S 20 P erht month per - Student based on the rated capacity Of the school; if double shifting .:L s effected then, irL that eve t the n student e. roan t �ill be pthe average daily:att"hdance for the e month preceding the billing. 57 (Edmondi­ 5/15/70) aw. 41 elf x j Aw iivi ��� � 1�.% � I ..PJ�J �b ". _ L.'}yiY. `r F`!�•,�5� l'�T {i� .T �' ti r.. 1C J. ^1S�}'l.' �%��,•7,��`f����y' >P['('1'ti,.�,�N �j'rR(0'rf �'f�i u1'NTc'^7 '��'+�Ci"yi^7^.U'�T(',':a.�R'�•C'p'.p�•�',i V""4�9: �:i ri �..y�'F'{„�'' T,^'�r.�m CITY OF EDMONDS ZONE PERMIT NUMBER B ' ER CONSTRUCTION PERMIT APPLICATION OWNER NAME/NAME OF BUSINESS . ADDRESS t SUITE/APTq } 0— ¢ a LEGAL DESCRIPTION CHECK SUBDIVISIPN NO. LID NO. Z MAILING ADDRESS O j �►,,, L �t� CITY ZIP TELEPHONE NUMBER PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY PER OFFICIAL STREET MAP. TESCP Approved ❑ RW Permit Required ❑ EXISTING ___ REQUIRED DEDICATION Street Use Permit Req'd ❑ NAME - ' PROPOSED+. 1.. InspectionRequired ❑ Sidewalk Required 13, 0 r- ' F ADDRESS REMARKS ) may/ �Jl� O ��. Z ¢ Lu z cr �-� Z Z a CITY ZIP TELEPHONE NUMBER��y. w y NAME �'j t.. i ¢ ADDRESS - ENGINEERING MEMO DATED J REWBY O U METER SIZE BUILDING SUPPLY SIZE NO. OF FIXTURES ' CC CT �/'J e, �yZIP TELEPHONE �NUMBER w OM1D1°'% U STATE LICENSE NUMBER 3 (a c SIGN AREA SEPA REVIEW ADS NO. Legal Description of Property - include all easements ALLOWED PROPOSED COMPLETE EXEMPT `, o �m �M n SHORELINE N i O aK as EXP r VARIANCE OR CU NNING REVIEW BY DATE Ft LU o42f `u ������ , le—S. `k c w C-b , O SETBACKS —FEET HEIGHT LOT CO RAGE Z C9 w J Tax Account Parcel NA10 r FRONT SIDE REA 3J 4 Z a /7'REMARKS NEW � RESIDENTIAL PLUMBING GI Yl El CI IF ADD/ALTER COMMERCIAL MECHANICAL": -,,-- 1:1APT. BLDG. El y LJ REPAIR SIGN GRADING / 1 DEMOLISH CYDS. C}v CHECKED BY TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION CODE HEIGHT ILJ I x� � CARPORT REMODEL GARAGE "L j SPECIAL INSPECTOR AREA OCCUPANCY J POOL. ❑WOOD STOVE) TAINING WALL/ RENEWAL INSERTqt, OCCUPANT REpUIRED GROUP LOAD YES — ROCKERY 00 (TYPE OF USE. BUSINESS OR ACTIVITY) EXPLAIN: REMARKS PROGRESS INSPECTIONS PER UBC 305 Z C 0 J NUMBER OF STORIES NUMBER OF o t to . DWELLING m UNITS ©� A L t S.S N Poo fa_ O - DESCRIBE WORK TO BE DONE(ATTACHPLOTPLAN) ' FINAL•INSP 710N REQUIRED POO ---4 VALUATION FEE PLAN CHECK FEE BUILDING !® 7 ' PLUMBING Plan Check No. !!ra MECHANICAL This Permit covers work to be done on private property ONLY. GRADINGIFIL t r ���% Any construction on the public domain (curbs, sidewalks, driveways, marquees, etc.) Will require separate permission. STATE SURCHARGE �� Permit Application: 180 Days J • 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 ENG. INSPECTION FEE N successors in interest, agrees to indemnify, defend and hold w harmless the City of Edmonds, Washington, its officials, s employees, and agents from any for damages �� 00 and all claims of , whatever nature, arising directly or indirectly from the issuance of this permit. Issuance of this permit shall not be deemed to a?LAN CHECK DEPOSIT modify, waive or reduce any requirement of any city ordinance ° nor limit in any way the City's ability to enforce any ordinance TOTAL AMOUNT DUE provision." i hereby acknowledge that I have read this application; that the Information glven.is correct; and that I am the owner, or the duly ATTENTION APPLICATION APPROVAL authorized agent of the owner. I agree to comply with city and state laws regulating construction; and in doing the work authoriz• THIS PERMIT AUTHORIZES This application is not a permit until ed thereby, no person will be employed in violation of the Labor ONLY THE signed by the Building Official or his/her Code of the State of Washington relating to Workmen's Compensa• WORK NOTED Deputy; and fees are paid, and receipt is ' tion Insurance. INSPECTIONacknowledged in spac provided. - SIGNATURE (OW OR)__ DATE SIGNED DEPARTMENT i ATURE DATE OKI • CITY OF 1 EDMONDS ATENTIOIV CALL FOR RELEA 'Ij ' '� ATE INSPECTION 7 IT IS UNLAWFUL TO USE OR OCCUPY A BUILDING OR STRUCTURE UNTIL A FINAL INSPECTION HAS BEEN MADE AND APPROVAL771-3202 OR ' ORIGINAL —File YELLo —`Inspector A CERTIFICATE OF •OCCUPAN Y HAS C S BEEN GRANTED:' UBC r' CHAPTER 3.