The URL can be used to link to this page

1152 2ND AVE S.PDFIIIIIIIIIIII 4848 1152 2N D AVE S It? c.1g9v CITY OF EDMONDS 121 5TH AVENUE NORTH • EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (425) 771-0220 • FAX (425) 771-0221 Website: wwwdedmonds.wa.us DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT Planning • Building • Engineering October 20, 2003 Ms. Suzan Matty 1152 Second Avenue South Edmonds, WA 98020 RE: Sewer Grinder Pump Installlation Dear Ms. Matty: GARY HAAKENSON MAYOR Coe . L , Your letter dated September 24, 2003 again requested City action regarding the grinder pump installation at your property at 1152 — 2nd Avenue South. The City has inspected and approved the grinder pump installation, and does not intend to take any further action. Any requests you may have to remove and reinstall the grinder pump, or to fill, grade or landscape the area around the grinder pump are private matters between you and Mr. Waite, the developer of the short plat who installed your grinder pump. In response to your comments regarding landscaping, it is our understanding that the grinder pump was not installed in a landscaped. area, but a dirt and gravel area. Regarding your comments that the: grinder pump was not installed at the approved elevation, we find nothing in the approved engineering drawings that require the grinder pump tank to be 92 inches deep. There is a note on the approved civil plans that the bottom of the pump basin will be at elevation 92.00 feet, but not that it be 92 inches deep. I would also point out that the City 's Regulations for Private Residential Sewage Pumps in Edmonds (Single Family Residential Only) dated May 9, 2002 require that the "Pump station lid shall be installed no less than 2 inches above the surrounding grade in dirt, grass, or garden areas. Lids shall be installed flush in concrete or asphalt surface areas." Your pump station is not installed in a concrete or asphalt area, and a pump station lid installed more that 2 inches above the surrounding grade in dirt, grass, or garden areas meets this requirement. Sincerely, AVID K. GEBERT, PE City Engineer Cc: Mayor Gary Haakenson Duane Bowman, Development Services Director Incorporated August 11, 1890 Sitar C:itu - Hokinan. Janan 1w� April 1, 2002 Summary of Staff Determination of Requirement To Upsize Water Main on 2nd Avenue South near Elm Street Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) 20.75.020 cites the purposes of Chapter 20.75, including "to facilitate adequate provisions for water, utilities, sewerage, storm. drainage, .... and other public requirements". (Attachment 1) ECDC 20.75.085D, in establishing the criteria to be used to review proposed subdivisions, gives City Staff the authority to require improvements including water lines, sewage systems, drainage systems and underground utilities, and requires that the person or body approving a subdivision shall determine the improvements necessary to meet the requirements of ECDC Title 18 (Public Works Requirements), ECDC Chapter 19.75 (Fire Code) as to fire hydrants, water supply and access, and the recommendations of the Community Development Director, the Public Works Director, and the Fire Chief. (Attachment 2) ECDC 19.75.100 requires that all water mains shall meet the provisions of Chapter 19.75 as well as all other applicable plans, standards, and ordinances adopted by the City of Edmonds. (Attachment 3) • ECDC 19.75.110 requires that water mains and appurtenances shall be installed as required by Chapter 19.75 as a condition of approval of subdivisions. (Attachment 3) ECDC19.75.120A requires that the developer will be responsible for paying the cost equivalent to installing a six-inch ductile iron water main for water main replacement, to City standards, plans and specifications. (Attachment 3) Based upon the above, it is clear that City Staff is authorized and required to require the appellant to be responsible for (and pay for) the cost of upsizing the water main on 2"d Avenue South to City standards up to 6 inch, with the City responsible for the difference between 6 inch and larger. The City standard for the required size of the water main on 2"a Avenue South is established as follows: • ECDC 19.75.160 requires that water mains in single-family areas shall be not less than six-inch. (Attachment 4) • The City's 1995 adopted Water Comprehensive Plan establishes criteria of 1500 gallons/minute (GPM) for fire flow in single-family residential neighborhoods. Based upon the Cit�'s water system model, this requires the existing four -inch water main on 2" Ave South near Elm Street to be upsized. (Attachment 5) • The City's 1995 adopted Water Comprehensive Plan identifies a specific requirement to upsize four -inch water mains. (Attachment 6) • The City's draft 2002 Water Comprehensive Plan confirms the 1500 GPM fire flow requirement in single-family residential neighborhoods, and identifies the four -inch water main on 2nd Ave South as insufficient to provide the required fire flow. (Attachment 7) • The City's draft 2002 Water Comprehensive Plan identifies a capital project to upsize the four -inch water main on 2nd Ave South near Elm Street in the year.2007. (Attachment 8) Furthermore, the Washington State Department of Health 1999 Water System Design Manual, which, used in conjunction with the regulations for public water systems (Chapter 246-290 WAC), represents the fundamental basis for water system design in Washington State, requires in paragraph 8.1.2 that any pipeline designed to provide fire flow must be at least six inches in diameter. (Attachment 9). Based upon the above, it is clear that City Staff is authorized and required to require the appellant to be responsible for (and pay for) the cost of upsizing the water main on 2nd Avenue South to City standards up to 6 inch, with the City responsible for the difference between 6 inch and larger, and that the City standard for the water main on 2nd Ave South is a minimum of six-inch diameter. 20.75:010 • -)K 20.75.010 Citation of chapter. This chapter may be cited as the City of Edmonds Subdivision Ordinance and shall supplement and implement the state regula- tions of plats, subdivisions and dedications found in Chapter 58.17 RCW. 20.75.020 Purposes. The purposes of this chapter are: A. To regulate the subdivision of land and to promote the public health, safety and gen- eral welfare in accordance with state standards to prevent overcrowding of land; B. To lessen congestion in the streets and C. To facilitate adequate provisions for water, utilities, sewerage, storm drainage, parks and recreation areas, sites for schools and playgrounds, and other public require - D. To provide for proper ingress and egress; E. To require uniform monumenting of subdivisions and accurate legal descriptions of subdivided lots. 20.75.025 Scope. This chapter shall apply to all divisions of land for any purpose except those set forth in RCW 58.17.040, including but not limited to: A. Divisions for cemetery plots or other burial plots; B. Divisions made by testamentary provi- sions, or by the laws of descent; C. Divisions for the purpose of lease when no residential structure other than mobile homes or travel trailers are permitted to be placed upon the land and the city of Edmonds has approved a binding site plan for the use of the land in accordance with this chapter. Divisions under subsections A and B of this section will not be recognized as lots for build- ing purposes unless all applicable require- ments of this chapter are met. 20.75.030 Subdivision defined. A. "Subdivision" means a division of land (Revised 5/00) 20-76 into lots of any size for the purpose of sale. The term subdivision includes all resubdivisions of land, short subdivisions, and formal subdivi- sions. The term lot includes tracts, parcels, sites and divisions. The term sale includes lease gift or development or any purpose not . excepted in this section. When reference to "subdivision" is made in this code, it is intended to refer to both "formal subdivision" and "short subdivision" unless one or the other is specified. B. "Formal subdivision" means a subdivi- sion of five or more lots. C. "Short subdivision" means a subdivision of four or fewer lots. 20.75.035 Compliance required. Any person wishing to create a subdivision . or lot line adjustment must first comply with this chapter. 20.75.040 " Application. Applications for subdivisions shall be made to the community development director on forms provided by the community develop- ment department. A subdivision application will be processed concurrently with any appli- cations for rezones, variances, planned unit developments, site plan approvals and other similar approvals, that relate to the proposed subdivision, unless the applicant expressly requests sequential processing. The applica- tion shall contain the following items in addi- tion to those specified in ECDC 20.95.010: A. A reproducible copy of the preliminary plat and the number of prints required by the community development department; B. Title report; C. A survey map, if required by the com- munity development director, of the exterior boundaries of the land to be subdivided, pre- pared by, and bearing the seal and signature of, a professional land surveyor registered in the state of Washington. This map can be com- bined with the preliminary ECDC 20.75.050 plat at the applicant's option; Arra c►+k4 oJr 1 - 20.75.070 • • e. The notice must include a legal description and either a vicinity location sketch or a location description in :nonlegal language. C. Time Limits for Staff Review. Staff review shall be completed within 20 working days from the date of filing. D. Formal Subdivision Review. The hear- ing examiner shall review a formal subdivision as provided in ECDC 20.100.010. E. Short Subdivisions - Staff Review. The director of community services shall review a short subdivision as provided in ECDC 20.95.050 (Staff Decision -Notice Required). F. Appeal of Staff Decision. Any person may appeal a decision of the community development director on a short subdivision under the procedure set forth in ECDC 20.105.030. [Ord. 3211 §§ 4, 5, 1998; Ord. 3112 §§ 17, 18, 19, 1996; Ord. 2379 § 2, 1983]. 20.75.070 Formal subdivision — Time limit. The city council shall make its final decision on a proposed formal subdivision within 90 days of the date of filing, unless the applicant agrees to extend the time. Where applicable, additional time needed to prepare and circulate an .environmental impact statement shall not be included within said 90 days. 20.75.075 Modifications. A. Request. Request for a modification to a requirement of this chapter shall be made on the regular subdivision application foam. The applicant shall state reasons to support the approval of the requested modification. B. Notice. The notice of the public hearing at which the applicant's proposed subdivision will be considered shall contain a description of the proposed modification. C. Consideration. The proposed modifica- tion shall be considered in the same manner as the proposed subdivision. The modification may be approved, or recommended for approval, only if all of the required findings set forth in Chapter 20.85 ECDC (Variances) can be made. [Ord. 3211 § 6, 1998]. 20.75.080 General findings. A proposed subdivision may be approved only if all of the following general findings can be made for the proposal, as approved or as conditionally approved: A. Subdivision Ordinance. The proposal is consistent with the purposes of this chapter (as listed in ECDC 20.75.020) and meets all requirements of this chapter. B. Comprehensive Plan. The proposal is consistent with the provisions of the Edmonds Comprehensive Plan, or other adopted city policy, and is in the public interest. C. Zoning Ordinance. The proposal meets all requirements of the zoning ordinance, or a modification has been approved as provided for in this chapter. D. Flood Plain Management. The proposal meets all requirements of the Edmonds Com- munity Development Code relating to flood plain management. [Ord. 2466, 1984]. 20.75.085 Review criteria. The following criteria shall be used to review ro osed subdivisions: A. Environmental. 1. Where environmental resources exist, such as trees, streams, ravines or wildlife hab- itats, the proposal shall be designed to mini- mize significant adverse impacts to the resources. Permanent restrictions may be imposed on the proposal to avoid impact. 2. The proposal shall be designed to minimize grading by using shared driveways and by relating street, house site and lot place- ment to the existing topography. 3. Where conditions exist which could be hazardous to the future residents of the land to be divided, or to nearby residents or prop- erty, such as flood plains, steep slopes or unstable soil or geologic conditions, a subdivi- sion of the hazardous land shall be denied (Revised 5/00) zaao K17AG N Nl G)T 2. Edmonds Commo Development Code 20.75.085- 11 unless the condition can be permanently cor- rected, consistent with paragraphs A(1) and (2) of this section. 4. The proposal shall be designed to minimize off -site impacts on drainage, views and so forth. B. Lot and Street Layout. 1. Lots shall be designed to contain a usable building area. If the building area would be difficult to develop, the lot shall be rede- signed or eliminated, unless special conditions can be imposed on the approval which will ensure that the lot is developed properly. 2. Lots shall not front on highways, arte- rials or collector streets unless there is no other feasible . access. Special access provisions, such as shared driveways, turnarounds or frontage streets may be required to minimize traffic hazards. 3. Each lot shall meet the applicable dimensional requirements of the zoning ordi- nance. 4. Pedestrian walks or bicycle paths shall be provided to serve schools, parks, pub- lic facilities, , shorelines and streams where street access is not adequate. C. Dedications. 1. The city council may require dedica- tion of land in the proposed subdivision for public use. 2. Only the city council may approve a dedication of park land to satisfy the require- ments of ECDC 20.75.090. The council may request a review and written recommendation from the planning advisory board. 20-80.1 (Revised 5/00) r E Edmonds Comity Development Code 3. Any approval of a subdivision shall be conditioned on appropriate dedication of land for streets, including those on the official street map and'the preliminary plat. 1. Improvements which may be re- quired, but are not limited to, streets, curbs, pe- destrian walks and bicycle paths, sidewalks, street landscaping, water lines, sewage sys- tems, drainage systems and underground utili- ties. 2. The person or body approving a sub- division shall determine the improvements necessary to meet the purposes and require- ments of this chapter, and the requirements of: a. ECDC Title 18, Public Works Requirements; b. Chapter 19.75, Fire Code, as to fire hydrants, water supply and access. This determination shall be based on the recommendations of the community develop- ment director, the public works director, and the fire chief. 3. The use of septic systems may be approved if all of the following conditions are met: a. It is more than 200 feet, multiplied by the number of lots in the proposed subdivi- sion, from the nearest public sf;wer main to the nearest boundary of the land to be divided. b. The land to be divided is zoned RS-20. c. The public works director and city health officer determine that soil, drainage and slope conditions are satisfactory for septic use and that all requirements of W.AC 248-96-090 are met. E. Flood Plain Management. All subdivi- sion proposals shall comply with the criteria set forth in the Edmonds Community Develop- ment Code for flood plain management. [Ord. 3211 § 7, 1998; Ord. 2466, 1984]. 20.75.090 Park land dedication. A. Dedication or In -Lieu of Fee Required. Before or concurrent with the approval of the final plat of any subdivision, the subdivider 0 20.75.100 shall dedicate land, pay a fee in -lieu of dedica- tion, or do a combination of both, for park and recreational purposes. B. Proposal of Dedication. Either the appli- cant or the city may propose dedication of a portion of the land to be divided in order to meet the regulations of this section. Payment of in -lieu fees is required unless dedication is proposed and approved. C. Review of Dedications. Dedication pro- posals shall be reviewed at the same time as the subdivision proposal. Any short subdivi- sion containing a dedication proposal shall be reviewed as if it were a formal subdivision. D. Factors for Review. Dedication propos- als shall be reviewed for consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, the Comprehensive Parks and Recreation Plan, and the Recre- ational Walks Plan. Other factors to be consid- ered include size, usability and accessibility of the land proposed for dedication, and the pos- sibility of coordinating dedication by owners of adjacent land. E. In -Lieu Fee. In -lieu park fees shall be as set in Chapter 15.00 ECDC. 20.75.100 Preliminary approval — Time limit. Approval of a preliminary plat or prelimi- nary short plat shall expire and have no further validity at the end of five years, unless the applicant has acquired final plat or final short plat approval within the five-year period. The five-year period for subdivisions shall com- mence upon the date of preliminary plat approval by the adoption of a written decision by the Edmonds city council. The five-year period for preliminary plats of short subdivi- sions shall commence upon the issuance of a final, written staff decision. In the event that either the decision of the city council or the staff is. appealed to the Snohomish County superior court, the five-year period shall com- mence upon the date of final confirmation of the preliminary plat or preliminary short plat decision by the judiciary. [Ord. 3230 § 1, 20-81 (Revised 3/99) Edmonds Comity Development Code 19.75.140 • • Unless the decision is revoked or modified, it shall remain in full force and effect until its expiration date, if any. `Such appeals shall be governed Iby the. procedures set forth in Chap- ter 20.100 and 20.105 ECDC. [Ord. 3215. § 1, 1998]. 19.75.090 Tanks abandoned'in place. Tanks abandoned. in place shall be aban- doned as follows: A: Flammable and combustible liquid shall be removed from the ank=and connected, pip- ing; B:''The suctjon, inlet; .gauge; vapor return and vapor line shall-be'disconnected; :C.,-`The tank shall be flied completely with an inert solid material; appr�wed;by the'fire chief. Exception: Residential' beating oil tanks .of .1;100 gallons; (4164 liters) or. 1ess;,,pro- vided, however;" that&':,the'.�fll line'is;: perma- nently capped or plugged below grade, in such a manner as to.prevent refilling of the tank; D. Remaining underground piping shall be capped or plugged;;and E. A record of the tank size, location, and date of abandonment shall .be retained:by the property owner and by the city. [Ord. 3215 § 1, 1998; Ord: 3114E§:1„19971. 19.75.100 Water mains and fire hydrants. All water mains and fire hydrant installa- fions shall meet the provisions of this chapter as well as all other applicable :plans, standards and ordinances adopted by the city of Edmonds. [Ord. 3215 .§ .1, 1998]. 19.75.110 Building permits and subdivisions. Fire hydrants, water mains and appurte- nances shall be installed as required by this chapter as a condition of approval of subdivi- sions and building permits unless conditions of undue hardship warrant a waiver by the fire chief and director of public works of this pro- vision. [Ord. 3215 § 1, 1998]. 19.75.120 Costs. A. Replacement. Water main replacement to city standards, plans and..specifications will be accomplished,by the city with the.property owner paying costs equivalent to the cost of installing a six-inch ductile iron water main and subject to the.following con4itions- 1. The 'city:will;pay:'for:all�fre°hydrants, system water mains required for -looping, and for the cost differential `between the cost of a six-inch ductile iron line and the costJor all lines .above .six�,,inches. 2. The, :property.- owners "i lH pay their share by an increase`in:the montly: water ser- vice'charge as shall -be detenrruned by:,the city council. 3. Any property: -:owner .seeking='to con- nect to the water -.;system.::subsequent; : to a replacement shall; as °,a condition: to - the approval:of the connection;:pay a sum equal to the actual cost of each-connection`plus.a rea- sonable connection charge as the-itity council shall determine so` that:,: the .property owner shall bear an equitable share of the total cost. B. New Installation. -The installation of water mains to :properties • not .. ,previously served shall be at the benefited. property owner's or developer's expense. C. Larger Mains. ,Oversized water. mains required for special use demands. shall be installed at the developer's or property owner's expense. D. Latecomers. If the water mains installed pursuant to subsections B and C of this section provide service or benefits to properties other than owned by the water main installer, late- comer agreements may be arranged between. the city and the installer for the construction and dedication of the water facilities pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 35.91 RCW. [Ord. 3215 § 1, 19981. 19.75.140 Location of hydrants (public). A. Definition. Public hydrants are those owned by the city. B. Intersections and Spacing. All public fire hydrants shall be installed at street inter- 19-33 4Tj_�4Gffj4'gj �- 3 (Revised 8/98) r • 19.75:150 • sections where possible. Public hydrants spac- ing shall be measured along vehicle access routes. C. Single -Family Residential Areas. In areas zoned for :single-family residential use, public hydrants shall be ;spaced no more than 600 feet apart.. 'If dead-end streets, or drive- ways, singly -or in combination; are over 300 feet long, additional. -public hydrants shall be installed so that the:.public hydrant spacing is nott over 600: feet. D: Other Areas..In areas other than single- 11amilyresidential;,public: ire. hydrants shall be spaced .an average --of 300 feet apart:` If.dead- end streets or driveways,'singly'or in combina- �tion, are. over 150 feet long, additional public .-hydrants: shall be' :installed so that the public hydrant spacing is .not` over 300; feet. [Ord. 3245:§=1.; `19981. 19.75.150 Location of hydrants (private). A. Definition..A private hydrant is pri- vately owned; but is subject .to the use of the city for inspection and testing at reasonable times, and for fire suppression at any time. B. When Required. All buildings except single-family dwellings that are located so that aportion is more than 200:feet from a street, as measured along vehicle access routes, shall have private fire hydrants located at the build- ing. C. Minimum Requirements. Buildings hav- ing required fire flows of less than 2,500 gal- lons per minute may have fire hydrants on one side of the building only. There shall never be fewer than two fire hydrants for any building larger than 5,000 square feet in the first floor area including covered parking and storage. When the required fire flow is over 2,500 GPM, the fire hydrants shall be served by a loop main around the building or complex of buildings. D. Spacing. Fire hydrants shall be spaced on an average 300 feet around the perimeter line, 50 feet out of the buildings. All hydrants shall be placed in a location accessible to fire department vehicles or where there are; roads. The fire chief shall determine the location of fire hydrants depending on utility, topography and building location for maximum fire.pro- tection. [Ord. 3215 § '1, 1998; Ord. 2610 § 1, 19871. 19.75.160 Mains and service lines. A. Main Size. All public hydrants in single- family areas shall be supplied:by not less than six-inch looped water, mains. II hydrants in areas other t an sing e= ami. y residential shall be supplied by not less than tight=inch looped water mains. 'Dead-end, water mains to hydrants mustbe at'least 6 lit inches in diam- eter, with the exception of mains up t650 feet long which maybe no less than six -inches in diameter. B:~'Service Lines:;The service line from the water main to the hydrant shall be nol less than six inches in diameter.: Any service lines over 50 feet. in length from water main to hydrant shall be no less than eight inches in diameter. C. Street Improvements. When city streets, or' state highways having water mains in the public right-of-way, are improved to perma- nent street or highway improvement standards, any water mains in the public right-of-way of said streets or highways that are substandard as to size or material according to applicable city standards shall be replaced with ductile iron water mains conforming. to applicable city standards and plans. [Ord. 3215 § 1, 1998]. 19.75.165 Hydrant specifications. A. Flush Type Hydrant. The installation of flush type hydrants (hydrants entirely below grade) is prohibited. B. Outlets. Fire hydrants shall have two two -and -one -half -inch hose outlets and one four -and -one -half -inch pumper outlet. All out- lets ports shall have national standard thread, and valve openings no less than five inches in diameter. Fire hydrants shall meet the Ameri- can Water Works Association, Standard No. C-502. C. Installation, Fittings and Valves. Fire hydrants shall be installed to meet sound engi- (Revised 8/98) 19-34 1*7_11C �jGtLC�ir SECTION V ' with this demand shows that there are no areas with deficient pressures. There are some areas with higher than desired pressures (>90 psi), but this is unavoidable with the hilly topography of Edmonds. Those services with high pressures are supplied with individual pressure reducing valves. The system was also analyzed to determine its ability to provide the required fireflow throughout the system with peak hourly demand. Areas in which serious deficiencies occurred were reevaluated with proposed improvements. ' The results of this analysis are presented in Table V- S. FIREFLOw DEMANDS Demand requirements for fire protection are based on the 1991 Uniform Fire q Code. Although many factors including building size, construction, type and use effect fireflow requirements, the following criteria for fire protection have been used in evaluation of the Edmonds water system: Land Use/ Fireflow Requirement Zoning Classification @ 20 psi Single Family Residential/RS 1500 gpm �. Multi -Family Residential/RM 3000 gpm Commercial/NB, BC, CW, CG 3000 gpm The existing zoning map (Figure III-2) was used to determine the fireflow requirements throughout the system. Future land use is assumed to remain consistent with the present zoning. FIREFLOw ANALYSIS FOR STEVENS HOSPITAL A special study was conducted on the Stevens Hospital area, due to problems with calibration of the model. A reduction factor was derived that approximates the difference between the field and computer models, and was applied to the year 2000 fireflow model The results of this analysis are included as Table V-6. f177tc�14G�l 5 rXIMWM-a+ V-¢ a nTs�Y* 1995 �1►�-' coMn�y�?�E ate/ SECTION Analysis of the system is presented in Section V. The storage and ;distribution network are generally adequate except for some areas where required fireflows cannot be delivered at minimum pressures. Improvements to the distribution system have been recommended to correct ,;.these deficiencies. The Capital Improvement Program presented in ..Section VII lists these improvements and prioritizes them by year from 1995 `through 2000 and as a group for the period beyond the year 2000. Table I-1 -._ summarizes the major features of the C.I.P. 1 ``.Because the City purchases water and does not have its own sources and .:treatment facilities, its monitoring requirements are limited. The City has an -excellent record of compliance with the monitoring program and delivers }ugh quality water to its customers. A) B) TABLE. 1-1 Summary of Improvements/Prioritization FIRST SIX -YEAR PLAN (1995-2000) 1) Improvements for fireflow Stevens Hospital and Edmonds High School Areas. Complete a 12" loop on 76th from 199th to 216th 2) Improvements for fireflow in Ballinger Area during summer (Alderwood supply only) conditions. Improvements for Stevens Hospital (listed above) and PRV near 244th/Hwy. 99 set at 30 psi, which will not allow flow from Seattle supply during peak demand periods, but allows for fireflow usage of the Seattle Supply. 3) Backup power for Five Comers Reservoir pump station. 4) Improvements for fireflow in areas near 12th Ave. between Main St. and 196th St. Connect existing pipelines near 199th/Maplewood and add PRVs for pressure control. 5) Improvements for fireflows citywide. Prioritize areas that have degraded steel lines. PLAN FOR THE YEARS 7-20 (2001-2014) Construct 1.5 million gallon tank near Hwy. 99/236th St. for improved fireflows in Ballinger area TABLE III-8 2012 Peak Hour Demand/ Lowest System Pressures Computer 1VIode1 :Node# : Location Pressure (psi) under Existing System conditions, Pressure (psi), with,proposed` ClP : improvements _ : . Pressure"with - Pump Control .'. Improvements @;Five. Corners 1522 Near 17804 69` Ave W 30 52 1447 85` Pl W & 218 th St SW 35 39 52 1446 85` Pl W & 216` St SW 36 39 53 91 9` Ave S & Dayton St 36 36 1389 Near 20911 81" PI W 36 40 53 1388 Near 20915 80` Pl W 37 40 53 31 Hi way 99 & 238 St SW 37 39 1458 80` Ave W & 213` St SW 38 41 54 1363 Near 20722 8 1 " Ave W 38 42 54 1387 80` PI W & 212` St SW 38 41 54 1445 86` Ave W & 216 St 38 41 55 1385 80` Ave W & 212` St SW 38 42 55 1386 80` Ave W & 212St SW 39 42 55 1093 72n Ave W & 180` St SW 39 54 1390 82" Ave W & 212` St SW 39 43 56 2012 Peak Hour Demand' Model with Fire flow Fire flow demands were modeled using the existing system configuration and with proposed improvements. The system is required to provide at least 20 psi during peak hour demand with a fire flow. Fire flows were modeled throughout the system. Fire flow requirements were based on the 1997 Uniform Fire Code and are based on many factors including building size, construction and type of use. Table III-9 details the general guideline for the Edmonds system based on these requirements. Areas in which serious deficiencies occurred were reevaluated with proposed improvements. The results of this analysis are shown in Table III-10. TABLE I11-9 Edmonds Fire Flow Criteria Land Use/ Zoning .Classification Fireflow Requirement:@ 20 PSI Single Family Residential/ RS 1500 gpm ewly Constructed Elementary coos ost Y 1990)* Multi -Family Residential/ RM 3000 gpm Commercial/ NB, BC, CW, CG 3000 gpm Newly Constructed High Schools (Post 1990)* 3000 m* Hospital 5000 gpM *Construction Standards/ Requirements for new development result in better fire safety. 4rT1icttAf6Nr 7 • TABLE 111-10 COMPUTER MODEL FIREFLOWS USING YEAR 2012 PEAK HOUR DEMANDS .40,"ts. Qh,,t 1 nf 'A Computer Fireflow Net GPM ireflow Net GPM Model GPM @ Fireflow Surplus W/Improv' Surplus Node # Location of Test 20 PSI Required Fireflow Proposed Improvements 020 PSI Fireflow 2 244th Near Hwy 99* 4205 3000 1205 None 10 SIR 104 & 244th* 1538 1500 38 None 18 241 st & 76th 3007 1500 1507 None :V AlderWdod ._,.!Iotq!�k4eter.ReplacerhdM(.,r ! �,.v 4 2' 99*�vJ 2285--�il- .3000 lrnprovemehts,@S;RUMPS", IV 26 240th & 78th 3598 30M 598 None I.. ";616 Aid Replacement 34 ,,:-236tli�� 119 --g - ?Pump b64 S' 4—QeiiSJSC�1-.,YR-,*��2 )n Infordw 4 V 2 38 234th & 78th 3151 3000 151 None 45 230th & 76th* 3006 3000 6 None . p, : *1 . >y7 u j;, 76 M.derwbod Master ter Replacement (T3-'YW`- 2003)'NoM-,-� Ballinger;AM T y IMpruvvr1HN1w.j.17?qT,R- 61 228th & 74th 1958 1500 458 None 56 224th & Hwy 99* 4209 3000 1209 None 63 :�"%3000.'�,; Alderw- 4et6r Replacementiff-3,O(R.? co.Master N pp),tiqrt!� B� ll Aiva-Improw .224th nger 7.f 7. 65 220th & Hwy 99- 5347 3000 2347 None 75 Bowdoln & 96th 4810 3000 1810 None 80 1 1th & Alder 3648 3000 648 None 89 8th & Maple 1880 1500 380 None 97 7th & Alder 4490 1500 2990 None 103 Pine & C 2237 15M 737 None 109 8th & Fir 2955 1500 1455 None 117 6th & Pine 4235 1500 2735 None aT rq?0 4. 2r.; T'R-5, 127 Zth & Hoimella ,1675- �sciuth 6d WmI&YR-'2007ff� 0 43621-,4 134 6th & Alder 3276 3000 276 None 137 Main & 5th 4897 3000 1897 None 1 '110 Ati�e6l�' %T . �', F%-' �SouthBimwl. ' - Q� 5t, 0027 TOR p 14 7 . r. 4 M1 -T 2.114, j S. gt 162 2nl M & ' 2211:118 6j,' Table VI-4 Water Rep acement Project Costs Year "LF6f 8'..'N ain--.-; Project Cost "Cost--pe''r'LF 2002-$'Cost -per LF*' 1998 3,711 313,218 $84 $99 2000. 4,459 320,837 $72 $78 2001 6,475 520,547 $90 $84 Average = $87 Average+ 10% contingency—]- $95 Note: 1999 project consisted of a large amount of 12" main and is therefore excluded. *Using 4% Inflation factor per year Table VI-5 Priority Ranking of Transmission and Distribution System Projects 2002-2008 , Otion; r�qjgRt paif� -.0. JO,6i4e s Ulfidefs �Pi Ti6l, -�g North Perrinville Area* 20 20 20 5 5 0 70 5530 2001 Total 5530 $520,547* I-J 20 0--',:, �,4,4-,!OfljN�$424;*00 4 20021-, -o" . io 0 Alderwood Master meter 50 0 0 5 0 0 55 $96,154 $100,0100 (2003), T-3 Chase Lake Area, 20 20 0 10 11 5 0 56 6090 $578,550 $601,692 T-4 North -Ballinger, T-5 10 20. 10 10 5 0 55 2345 $222,775 $231,686 2003 Total 8435 $897,479 $933,378 tiledil'd' I e-, NFA B-i"Iffi 'AO- .i Edifi JE o- ',20,- "S Bo-Z' 77th PI W, T-8 10 10 10 10 10 0 50 2000 $142,500 $213,724 South Ballinger, 0 20 10 5 5 0 40 4760 $452,200 $508,664 2005 Total 6760 $642,200 $722,388 0 Rg"�. 5 S ?3 .4 •hi -r$*49'5ir45' i4623-,�476 -:7 I -T• z ,ilo Z� - I - - '2�' 45 40 7 7� South Bowl, T- 12 20 0 0 5 5 0 30 7595 $676,400 $877AS �O7 T�ol 7595 $676,400 $877 R�-, 5 W 8 6xi T -P .5 ,W,'q-J 0 $50.4862 9M . . . P . . . . . . . A w-C, • 2 F, X" U%M P-M '6 $5$7, Q 3141-,.969 otil !t *2001 Project is complete, cost shown is bid price. CITY OF EDMO CA*AL IMPROVEMENT PRojErr DESCRIPTION PROJECT ID: T-12 ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $877,845 PROJECT NAME South Bowl Water Distribution System Irrirovements Walnut St Holly Dr Howell Homeland Dr n� Q Erb n s Pine St 0 0) Forsyth 0) > 0) > > Q Q Dr Q 75 S � > Q � ElmCU s > WY `c Elm St Q 7 S Ln PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Replace the following lines with 8" Ductile Iron Pipe water main and hydrants and associated appurtenances: 1)Existing 4" cast iron mains on 5th Ave S between Elm Way and Walnut St , on 2"d Ave S between Pine St and Elm St, on Elm St between 2"d Ave S and 3`d Ave S, on 4th Ave S between Howell Wy and Pine St, on Erben Dr between 4th Ave S and 3rd Ave S, on Homeland Dr from 5th Ave S to east dead end, and on Holly Dr from 5th Ave S to east dead end. 2) Existing 6" cast iron main on Forsyth Ln between 5th Ave S and 6th Ave S. PROJECT BENEFIT/RAT/ONAILE: To provide improved fire flow and domestic service. SCHEDULE: 2007 COST BREAKDOWN PROJECT COST 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Planning/Study Engineering & $87,785 Administration Construction $790,065 1 % for Art TOTAL $877,845 R:\engr\danielle\capproj\summary sheeMimual WaterReplacement.doc • 0 WATER SYSTEM DESIGN MANUAL June1999 Washington State Department of (�*Health Environmental Health Programs For more information or Additional copies of this manual contact: Division of Drinking VVater New Market Industrial Campus 7171 Cleanwater Lane, Building 3 PO Box 47822 Olympia WA 98504- T822 (360) 236-3100 or 1-800-521-0323 DOH #331-123 /frr�utR�i `l PREFACE The Water System Design Manual (WSDM), used in conjunction with the regulations for public water systems (Chapter 246-.290 WAC), represents the fundamental ba water system design in Washington State.. he approac taken in this manual for design of water systems and their componen s as involved (1) development of performance standards rather than prescriptive standards, (2) placement of mandatory requirements in WAC with corresponding reference made to support "shall" or "must" statements in the WSDM, (3) provision of alternative design approaches to what is presented in the WSDM when a specific proposal meets considerations of "good engineering practice" and is supported by documented justification, and (4) allowance for the customers of an individual water system to participate in the determination of their own level or standard of reliable water service under abnormal circumstances, provided that protection of public health is not compromised. The WSDM is further intended to provide a basis for establishing the "standard of care" for engineering professionals involved in water system design. The WSDM has been developed to provide guidance predominately for the design of smaller public water systems; typically those less than 1000 service connections in size. The guidance also has applicability to expanding water systems of any size and to systems classified as being complex Group B systems. however, it is recognized, and expected, that existing local ordinances, consumer service: expectations, and existing water use data will normally serve to provide more appropriate design criteria in most instances. It is generally recognized and advocated by DOH that use of system specific information is a more accurate basis for design of water system expansions than are any other criteria. Separate water system design. guidelines are available for simple Group B water systems not requiring professional engineering expertise. The Board of Registration of Professional Engineers and Land Surveyors determines what constitutes the practice of "engineering" in Washington State. A court decision provided direction to the Board and to DOH by stating that "Non-professional engineer designers (including laypersons and registered sanitarians) will not be permitted or authorized to design public water systems except those serving fewer than 10 connections and consisting solely of a simple well and pressure tank with one pressure zone; and not providing any special treatment or having special hydraulic considerations..." Based upon these requirements it is expected that smaller, more complex systems, as well as larger systems, will be designed by Professional Engineers. General Water System Reliability Considerations This manual also provides recommendations regarding concerns over the sometimes complex and controversial issue of wager system reliability. Although there appears to be no consensus opinion as to all the defining characteristics of a "reliable" system, a 1997 American Water Works Association Research Foundation (AWWARF) project entitled "Managerial Assessment of Water Quality and System Reliability" was conceived and published to initiate a national dialogue on the integral nature of water quality and water quantity reliability. Forty utility managers from around the nation participated in a consensus "American Assembly" process to develop an American Assembly Statement on the topic. Excerpts from their report are included Es CHAPTER 8 TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION MAIN DESIGN Transmission mains and distribution mains normally represent the largest portion of the initial cost. of a water system and are basically unseen upon completion, so good design and construction of these facilities is paramount: to delivering a safe, adequate, reliable supply as economically as possible. The major design factors are the size, type of materials, and location of the facilities with respect to meeting the demands of the customers within the service area. 8.0 Transmission and Distribution Main Definitions A transmission main (usually larger diameter pipe) is used to convey the majority of flow from source, treatment, and/or storage facilities to the distribution system. A transmission main, although it may, have a small number of service connections on it, is intended to deliver water to the distribution mains whert� the majority of service connections are located. A distribution main is the delivery system to individual customer service lines and provides water for fire protection through fire hydrants, if applicable. 8.1 Facility Sizing Water system main sizing should consider a number of factors including pumping costs, system s' ;' demand, land use, friction losses, and flow velocities. These factors are interrelated and their relative influences in the selection of optimum piping arrangements should be recognized. As a whole, transmission lines, distribution facilities, water sources, pumping facilities, and storage facilities must be designed so that, in combination, they will optimize the water system and, at a minimum, provide for the demand conditions at pressures established in WAC 246-290-230, anticipated at any given time: in all parts of the system. 8.1.1 Sizing Procedures Procedures for sizing distribution and transmission lines for water systems have been established in many engineering textbooks, reference books, and design manuals. There are also many common computer software packages available to readily aid in the design of complex systems. It is expected that the design procedures used will be consistent with those applied and accepted by the professional civil engineering discipline as good engineering practice. 8.1.2 Minimum Size I The minimum size for a transmission or distribution main must be determined by a hydraulic analysis [WAC 246-290-230(l) and (9)]. The hydraulic analysis needs to address the'parameters outlined in Section 8.2. Mains are generally sized with the ability to provide flow rates required Water System Design Manual June 1999 8-1 • to serve the anticipated land use in that vicinity of the system as characterized in the water system plan (WSP) and the local land use plan. The minimum diameter of all distribution mains must be six (6) inches, unless justified by a hydraulic analysis [WAC 246-290-230 2 .Any pipeline res—ignW—top—rovide fire flow must be at least six (6) inches in diameter [WAC 246-290-230(3)]. Sizing mains using a hydraulic analysis must, at a minimum, consider two demand scenarios per WAC 246-290-230(5) and (6). First, the system must be capable of delivering the peak hourly demand (PHD) at the required pressure of 30 psi at every existing and proposed service connection. If fire flow is to be provided, the distribution pipelines must also be capable of delivering the maximum day demand (MDD) rate, in addition to the fire flow, at the required pressure of 20 psi throughout the distribution system. This analysis is further described in Sections 8.1.5 and 8.2.3. The required size for mains is the largest determined by analyses of the two demand scenarios. 8.1.3 Peak Hourly Demand (PHD) Distribution pipelines must be able to sufficiently deliver water to meet peak customer demands (commonly defined as peak hourly demand) at 30 psi at every existing and proposed service connection per WAC 246-290-230(5). (Note: This was termed maximum instantaneous demand (MID) in previous editions of DOH design. guidelines.) The peak hourly demand (PHD) is the maximum rate of water use, excluding fire flow, that can be expected to occur within a defined service area over a continuous sixty minute time period. Unless there exists accurate water demand records identifying PHD, the equations identified in Chapter 5 of this manual should be used for determining PHD for design. If more than one pressure zone exists, each PHD value needs to be calculated separately for each zone and analyzed appropriately. 8.1-A Fire "Suppression" Flow Fire flow rate and duration requirements shall be determined by the local fire control authority or the Public Water System Coordination Act, Chapter 246-293 WAC, for systems within the boundaries of a designated Critical Water Supply Service Area (CWSSA). Chapter 246-293 WAC also applies to any system in the state with more than 1000 services (WAC 246-293-602.) The more stringent criteria would apply [WAC 246-290-22](5)]. Typically, the fire control authority is the local town or city fire chief, or county fire marshal in unincorporated areas, although some incorporated areas may contract for fire protection services with a district or the county. There are other reasons, in addition to assuring public safety, why providing adequate fire flow to a community is so important. The water system's capability to provide fire flow is one of the main criteria used to establish the insurance rating for that local fire district. The ratings ("one" is very good to "ten" is very bad) are used by the insurance industry to estimate the relative fire risk and set local insurance rates accordingly. Fire insurance premiums are lower for businesses and homeowners located in fire protection municipalities or districts that have earned a better rating. Water System Design Manual June 1999 8-2 5 v,= ¢11/o z.. 4. .m • • 75, D. Improvements. 1. Improvements which may be re- iquired, but are not limited to, streets, curbs, pe- destrian walks and bicycle paths, sidewalks, j street landscaping, water lines, sewage sys- 1 tems, drainage systems and underground utili- ties. .:2. The, person or body approving a sub -division Shall determine the. improvements i necessary to meet the: purposes and r.equire- ments ofthis chapter, and the requirements of: -a. ECDC. Title 118, Public Works j Requirements; b . Chapter'1935 Fire Code, as to fire hydrants; A,ater.supply and access. This determination shall be based on the j recommendations of Ithe. community develop- ment directof, the public works director, and the fire chief. 19.75.100 Water mains and fire hydrants. All water mains an&fire 'hydrant' installa- tions shall meet the provisions of this chapter as well as all other applicable plans, standards i and ordinances adopted by the city of Edmonds. [Ord. 3215 §.1, 19981. 19.75.110 Building permits and subdivisions. Fire hvdrants, water mains and appurte- nances shall be installed as required by this chapter as a condition of approval of subdivi- sions and building permits unless conditions of undue hardship warrant a waiver by the fire chief and director of public works of this pro- vision. [Ord. 3215 § 1, 19981. 0. eq,,✓es S,j� i /� 19 75 :126. ' Costs. A. -Replacernent. Water main: replacement to city standards, plans and specifications will j be accomplished by the city wrth the property owner. paying costs equivalent to'the: cost of a; installing a six, -inch ductile iron. water main and subiect to the`-the`ng-coriditions: 0,00 ,7Xe �--c r-.4 5;01 to 6iG� V� 19.75.160 Mfains and service lines. A. Main Size. All publichydrants in single- family areas shall be supplied`by not less than six-inch looped water mains. z y. .. +w �.<^ 1-t2_n '''i:.si' rr-t:. -.,=. i.....} t✓. �"i...... cJi k.: _ .t. .1 .. l % IRA - SECTION SECTION V with this demand shows that there are no areas with deficient pressures. . There are some areas with higher than desired pressures (>90 psi), but this is unavoidable with the hilly topography of Edmonds. Those services with high pressures are supplied with individual pressure reducing valves. The system was also analyzed to determine its ability to provide the required fireflow throughout the system with peak hourly demand. Areas in which serious deficiencies occurred were reevaluated with proposed improvements. rThe results of this analysis are presented in Table V- 5. FIREFLOw DEMANDS Demand requirements for fire e protection are based on the 1991 Uniform Fire Code. Although many factors including building size, construction, type and use effect fireflow requirements, the following criteria for fire protection have been used in evaluation of the Edmonds water system: Land Use/ Fireflow Requirement Zoning (3 sification @ 20 psi Single Family Residential/RS 1500 gpm Multi -Family Residential/RM 3000 gpm Commercial/NB, BC, CW, CG 3000 gpm The existing zoning map (Figure III-2) was used to determine the fireflow requirements throughout the system. Future land use is assumed to remain consistent with the present zoning. FIREFLOw ANALYSIS FOR STEVENS HOSPrfAL A special study was conducted on the Stevens Hospital area, due to problems with calibration of the model. A reduction factor was derived that approximates the difference between the field and computer models, and was applied to the year 2000 fireflow model. The results of this analysis are included as Table V-6. 1 11 772wwue4 V-4 I9� W&J m SECTION (Analysis of the system is presented in Section V. The storage and -distribution network are generally adequate except for some areas where required fireflows cannot be delivered at minimum pressures. ` 'Improvements to the distribution system have been recommended to correct ' _these deficiencies. The Capital Improvement Program presented in Section VII lists these improvements and prioritizes them by year from 1995 "�Ihrough 2000 and as a group for the period beyond the year 2000. Table I-1 -summarizes the major features of the C.I.P. -,Because the City purchases water and does not have its own sources and treatment facilities, its monitoring requirements are limited. The City has an :excellent record of compliance with the monitoring program and delivers >}gh. quality water to its customers. R A, 7� TABLE 1-1 Summary of improvements/Prioritization FIRST SIX -YEAR PLAN (1995-2000) 1) Improvements for fireflow Stevens Hospital and Edmonds High School Areas. Complete a 12" loop on 76th from 199th to 216th. 2) Improvements for fireflow in Ballinger Area during summer (Alderwood supply only) conditions. Improvements for Stevens Hospital (listed above) and PRV near 244th/Hwy. 99 set at 30 psi, . which will not allow flow from Seattle supply during peak demand periods, but allows for fireflow usage of the Seattle Supply. 3) Backup power for Five Comers Reservoir pump station. 4) Improvements for fireflow in areas near 12th Ave. between Main St. and 196th St. Connect existing pipelines near 199th/Maplewood and add PRVs for pressure control 5) Improvements for fireflows citywide. Prioritize areas that have degraded steel lines.. PLAN FOR THE YEARS 7-20 (2001-2014) 1) 2) 3) x1772WWI38I Construct 1.5 million gallon tank near Hwy. 99/236th St. for improved fireflows in Ballinger area. Replace existing 4- and 6-inch steel lines with larger ductile iron pipes - Replace existing flinch cast iron pipes with larger ductile iron pipes- 1-2 TABLE III-8 2012 Peak Hour Demand/ Lowest System Pressures Computer _Modell Node#: Location : ".Pressure 'si) - (p under � _Existing,CEP* System conditions Pressure (psi) with proposed .. ' improvements . Pressufe'with ' Puirip Control Impfovements <. y,@ Five Corners; t 1522 Near 17804 69` Ave W 30 52 1447 851Pl W & 218` St SW 35 39 52 1446 85` Pl W & 216` St SW 36 39 53 91 9th Ave S & Dayton St 36 36 1389 Near 20911 81" PI W 36 40 53 1388 Near 20915 80` PI W 37 40 53 31 Highway 99 & 238` St SW 37 39 1458 80th Ave W & 2131St SW 38 41 54 1363 Near 20722 8 1 " Ave W 38 42 54 1387 80` PI W & 212` St SW 38 41 54 1445 86 Ave ITV & 216` St 38 41 55 1385 80` Ave W & 212` St SW 38 42 55 1386 80` Ave W & 212` St SW 39 42 55 1093 72° Ave W & 1801St SW 39 54 1390 82" Ave W & 212` _St SW 39 43 56 2012 Peak Hour Demand Model with Fire flow Fire flow demands were modeled using the existing system configuration and with proposed improvements. The system is required to provide at least 20 psi during peak hour demand with a fire flow. Fire flows were modeled throughout the system. Fire flow requirements were based on the 1997 Uniform Fire Code and are based on many factors including building size, construction and type of use. Table III-9 details the general guideline for the Edmonds system based on these requirements. Areas in which serious deficiencies occurred were reevaluated with proposed improvements. The results of this analysis are shown in Table III-10. TABLE III-9 Edmonds Fire Flow Criteria Land JseCZorurig ,Classification . :Fifeflow Requirement @ 20 sl Single Family Residential/ RS 1500 gpm Newly Constructed Elementary Schools (Post , 1990)* 2250 gpm* Multi -Family Residential/ RM . 3000 gpin Commercial/ NB, BC, CW, CG 3000 gpm Newly Constructed High Schools Post 1990 * 3000 m* Hospital 5000 gpm *Construction Standards/ Requirements for new development result in better fire safety. �^^+ gfo-•,, Oyu. lm a.F�ws!- 6 ,i Imo^ CHAPTER 8 TRANSM SSION AND DISTRIBUTION MAIN DESIGN Transmission mains and distribution mains normally represent the largest portion of the initial cost of a water system and are basically unseen upon completion, so good design and construction of these facilities is paramount to delivering a safe, adequate, reliable supply as economically as possible. The major design factors are the size, type of materials, and location of the facilities with respect to meeting the demands of the customers within the service area. 8.0 Transmission and Distribution Main Definitions A transmission main (usually larger diameter pipe) is used to convey the majority of flow from source, treatment, and/or storage facilities to the distribution system. A transmission main, although it may have a small number of service connections on it, is intended to deliver water to the distribution mains where the majority of service connections are located. A distribution main is the delivery system to individual customer service lines and provides water for fire protection through fire hydrants, if applicable. 8.1 Facility Sizing ift Water system main sizing should consider a number of factors including pumping costs, system demand, land use, friction losses, and flow velocities. These factors are interrelated and their relative influences in the selection of optimum piping arrangements should be recognized. As a whole, transmission lines, distribution facilities, water sources, pumping facilities, and storage facilities must be designed so that, in combination, they will optimize the water system and, at a minimum, provide for the demand conditions at pressures established in WAC 246-290-230, anticipated at any given time in all parts of the system. 8.1.1 Sizing Procedures Procedures for sizing distribution and transmission lines for water systems have been established in many engineering textbooks, reference books, and design manuals. There are also many common computer software packages available to readily aid in the design of complex systems. It is expected that the design procedures used will be consistent with those applied and accepted by the professional civil engineering discipline as good engineering practice. 8.1.2 Minimum Size The minimum size for a transmission or distribution main must be determined by a hydraulic analysis I WAC 246-290-230(1) and (9)]. The hydraulic analysis needs to address the parameters outlined in Section 8.2. Mains are generally sized with the ability to provide flow rates required Water Svstem Design Manual June 1999 8-1 to serve the anticipated land use in Ithtvicinity of the system as characterized in the water system plan (WSP) and the local land use plan. The minimum diameter of all distribution mains must be six (6) inches, unless justified by a hydraulic analysis [WAC 246-290-230(2)]. Any pipeline designed to provide fire flow must be at least six (6) inches in diameter [WAC 246-290-230(3)]. %�--- Sizing mains using a hydraulic analysis must, at a minimum, consider two demand scenarios per WAC 246-290-230(5) and (6). First, the system must be capable of delivering the peak hourly demand (PHD) at the required pressure of 30 psi at every existing and proposed service connection. If fire flow is to be provided, the distribution pipelines must also be capable of delivering the maximum day demand (MDD) rate, in addition to the fire flow, at the required pressure of 20 psi throughout the distribution system. This analysis is further described in Sections 8.1.5 and 8.2.3. The required size for mains is the largest determined by analyses of the two demand scenarios. 8.1.3 Peak Hourly Demand (PHD) Distribution pipelines must be able to sufficiently deliver water to meet peak customer demands (commonly defined as peak hourly demand) at 30 psi at every existing and proposed service connection per WAC 246-290-230(5). (Note: This was termed maximum instantaneous demand (MID) in previous editions of DOH design guidelines.) The peak hourly demand (PHD) is the maximum rate of water use, excluding fire flow, that can be expected to occur within a defined service area over a continuous sixty minute time period. Unless there exists accurate water demand records identifying PHD, the equations identified in Chapter 5 of this manual should be used for determining PHD for design. If more than one pressure zone exists, each PHD value needs to be calculated separately for each zone and analyzed appropriately. 8.1.4 Fire "Suppression" Flow Fire flow rate and duration requirements shall be determined by the local fire control authority or the Public Water System Coordination Act, Chapter 246-293 WAC, for systems within the boundaries of a designated Critical Water Supply Service Area (CWSSA). Chapter 246-293 WAC also applies to any system in the state with more than 1000 services (WAC 246-293-602.) The more stringent criteria would apply [WAC 246-290-221(5)]. Typically, the fire control authority is the local town or city fire chief, or county fire marshal in unincorporated areas, although some incorporated areas may contract for fire protection services with a district or the county. There are other reasons, in addition to assuring public safety, why providing adequate fire flow to a community is so important. The water system's capability to provide fire flow is one of the main criteria used to establish the insurance rating for that local fire district: The ratings ("one" is very good to "ten" is very bad) are used by the insurance industry to estimate the relative fire risk and set local insurance rates accordingly. Fire insurance premiums are lower for businesses and homeowners located in fire protection municipalities or districts that have earned a better rating. Water System Design Manual June 1999 8-2 SYSTEM ANALYSIS Facility Design Standards Table III-2 details the more important Facility design standards: ! TABLE III-2 Facility Design Standards Standard R DOH.. 1Xater System: Design City.. of Edmonds Standazds/ f . 4Manual'Standards Comments Minimum Any pipeline designed to Same as DOH plus: For all new mains Pipe provide :fire flow must be at over 50 feet long; 1) All hydrants in Diameters_ least 6 inches in diameter. The single-family areas shall be supplied minimurn size for a by not less than 6 inch looped water transmission or distribution mains or have dead end water mains of main must be determined by at least 8 inch diameter. 2) In areas hydraulic analysis. other than single family, 8-inch looped mains are required. Backup Power On -site backup power Backup power installed at Five equipment. or gravity standby Corners pump station. Standby storage storage is highly recommended is adequate per DOH guidelines Fire Hydrant Not specific. Code requires Fire Hydrants to be Spacing spaced no more than 600 feet for Single -Family Residential Areas. In other Areas hydrants are required to be spaced an average of 300 feet apart. Water Valve As a general rule, valves on Same as DOH Spacing distribution mains of 12 inches and smaller should be located such that a water main length of not more than 1,000 feet can be isolated by valve closure. WATER QUALITY ANALYSIS Source Water Quality 1) Everett Water Source. The Everett water source originates from the Sultan River Basin at the Spada Reservoir, located approximately 25 miles east of Everett. The basin is protected and patrolled. It is then routed by pipe to the Chaplain Reservoir. There the water is filtered, chlorinated and flouridated. The water is also chlorinated at the Alderwood Water District reservoir site, prior to distribution to Edmonds. This ensures good chlorine residual throughout the distribution system. Source water quality has been good in the past and should continue to meet all of the mandated water quality requirements. 2) Seattle Water Source. The Seattle water source originates from the Tolt River at the South Fork Tolt Reservoir, located about 13 miles east of Duvall. This watershed is located in an uninhabited area of the Cascade mountains, and land is owned by the Seattle Water Department, the U.S. Forest Service and the Weyerhauser Company. 111-2 /30/2003 23:56 2069353000 FOG—TITE,INC PAGE 02 =RING AS REOUIREP NOTES: • MATERIAL: Co ST IRON, ASTM A--48, CL 30 • MACHINE MATT 4G SURFACES AND SIDE WALLS �. • 1/2" x 3/4" DIAMOND PLATE THFIEAD PATTERN APPROX. WEIGF T: RING — 200 Lg ..S COVEF — 2 1 5 I Rc ILRECESVE® ED 0 5 2003 .OPMENT SERVICES REF# OF034 I 30" x 6" MANHOLE RING AND COVER RAVING -- H2O PART NO. MH69 ,7 o i ¢2.C, ,� .._ _ ♦ti. � `� �....:L'��'. .'�^vi.: r.. ,. - rJll.+��. ... .t....+".w[4flf•c ...•�-^-•+� - _ - _ 'l r IF ... '� .. a,;,lY' �; .. T.01t,.%C, Y'- 1,r,.1 yu-�,ry,�•,�YfR'i en-`t •- � PERMIT NO: Cltyof Edmonds 9�8 17C. ,$90 SIDE SEWER PERMIT PERMIT EXPIRES Address of Construction: Property Tax Account Parcel No. 005 92 d Q404, — CYO 47'GC Attach.copies of all access and utility easements A4--'Verified and Approved by Owner and/o Contractor: 400147T Contractor License #: I i."t�(3 0 10 P Building Permit* Single Family Invasion into City *.Right -of Way: ❑,Yes XNo ❑ Multi -Family (No. of Units _� *RW Construction Permit # ❑ , Commercial (No. of Units ) Cross -other'* *Private Property: ❑ Yes No ❑ Public *.*Attach legal description and copy of recorded easement.. Owner/ ontractor C Owner or contractor signature and acknowledgement statement:. _ Date. .. By signing for this permit I certify that I have read the City's public handout entitled ide;Sewer Specifications, and shall comply with all City requirements outlined. therein. r ' _ t 9 :CALL DIAL -A -DIG (1-800-42 5555)' BEFORE ANY EXCAVATION 9, y' W FOR INSPECTION CALL 425-771-0220 extensiona,32-d 24 HOUR NOTICE RIEQUIRED FOR ALL INSPECTION REQUESTS . FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Permit Fee $ Repair Fee $... Issued By: $ ��•'� Date Issued: 2 Assessment Fee $ Receipt No: City Permit Surcharge Fee 5.00 Total Fees Paid $ NOTE: 'IF JOB SITE IS NOT READY. FOR INSPECTION WHEN INSPECTOR ARRIVES A $45 RE -INSPECTION FEE WILL BE CHARGED. . Job Site Ready YES NO - Date: Initial: Partial Inspection: Date: Initial:' - Partial Inspection: Date: Initial: FINAL INSPECTION APPROVED: Date: �� 5 Q2 initial:_As-built to Street File: �] `f, PERMIT'MIUST.BE POSTED ON JOB SITE I_� While Copy: File Green Copy: ' Inspector Buff Copy: Applicant L;temp;bldg for ms;sspermitj lg4/00 0 ol 0 V, 20' O U O 3' N +' W i 't30 Q . 450 U � O Z � N grinder pump of ED* CITY OF EDMONDS SIDE SEWER AS —BUILT ADDRESS SCALE va 1152 2N D AVE S NTS HOMEOWNER CONTRACTOR BUILT BY DESIGN DATE DRAWN PERMIT 18g0 11 /25/02 BY I. ABILA NO, 9682 September 24, 2003 Mr. Dave Gebert, PE City Engineer City of Edmonds 121 5`h Avenue North Edmonds WA 98020 Dear Dave, f a4jL c BAc4,, RECEIVE[) SEP 26 2003 ENGINEERING DIVISION You may recall I met with you., Duane Bowman and our Mayor, at my property, 1152 Second Avenue S. All are aware of the dilemma resulting from installation of a sewer grinder tank in my rear yard. I subsequently researched city standards with regard to "Regulations for Private Residential Sewage Pumps in Edmonds (Single Family Residential Only)". It seems clear to me that the city Engineering Department did not comply with standards or meet inspection requirements when approving sewer grinder tank installation preformed by developer Mr. Stephen Waite. I refer to the above publication., Pump Stations, General Design, Site Requirement, item 4. "Landscaping shall be provided consistent with the proposed development and existing properties." Landscaping was not and is not provided consistent with the proposed development OR existing properties.. The proposed development... the development is now complete. Installation of the sewer grinder tank on the recently developed property is level with existing landscaping. The existing properties... the tank protrudes above ground level approximately one foot. It obstructs an approximate 10-fo6t square area. The area in my rear yard was used for lawn furniture in the spring and summer months as well as parking, turn -around, drive access as I chose, year-round. Tank installation prohibits any of the prior uses of my property. The topical, visual and practical use of my rear yard has seriously devalued my property, rendering a major portion unusable and unsightly. City standards have clearly not been met. Installation of the tank was not in compliance with those standards. x The sewer tank needs to be removed, properly installed at the 92 depth as originally. required (engineering drawings) and landscaping returned to original condition. It is my understanding that the tank was installed at an 81" depth... could that explain the one -foot above ground problem? I am simply asking that the city of Edmonds remedy their errors. Please, each of you, ask .yourselves, would you accept this obstruction and destruction to your personal property? Would you turn to your city, asking them to admit to and remedy those .errors? Please let me hear from you at your earliest convenience. Thank you. incerely uzan a y l l l 5, °d Avenue S, Ed rids 98020 C:. Duane Bowman Gary Haakenson September 24, 2003, Mr. Dave Gebert, PE City Engineer City of Edmonds 121 5`1' Avenue North Edmonds WA 98020 Dear Dave, RECEIVED SEP 2 6 2003 ENGINEERING DIVISION I recently filed a Request for Public Records regarding property development at 1152 Second Avenue South. One of my concerns was the asphalt drive/private street, installed: by the developer. One record I received is a plat drawing titled "As Built", approved by the city of Edmonds, Engineering Division. The "approved" drawing shows an 18" asphalt border on the north AND south side of the asphalt private driveway. The 18" border was constructed on the north side. The 18" border on the south side of the driveway does not exist. How will the city remedy this situation? With all respect, Dave, I have experienced continuous problems asa result of development issues. Each of which seem to center on city Engineering Department negligent approvals, non -compliant standards approvals and perhaps incompetent attention to development within our city.. I await your response and proposed remedy to this driveway issue. Sincerely, Suzan Matty C: Duane Bowman Gary Haakenson ok h Sr-(L RECEIVED NOV 8 - 4J2 ENGINEERING DIVISION cRg-(s MAP t5VA/lorJ05 CoMM. pr-,vl-=L. S aULCES f aoM 57(E�Lis L-1At7v vAIC 1(/0(./02 fA/L k W15Q , RECEIVE® NOV d 6 2�-2 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Ul LC) p54 al5u�slo,y' yes t �Y q�= 7� lc u A-r �4/X, ff! p6,5-,qs(F- PlNd 1-b 0&Q CIL 9S,,uJ57AIrS 1�(.��5� /J-aulSE iM�uEar�� rr-c; C �Zs ��-4 - 5533) • su N E,v �E 6:S w 2�f Atlrl� ----tm.5 WtNSrpe. New oOQr�L�G �-NPW> cu¢g ((, : () w Cr Ur-( GUT So +� 2_2,o4'_ C X (s•-tCN4. rAuev R.©A 10 T ar- Exist I 't' Iw�+�w ntw -Flo I pbr0 A 5 ft*. Phi Y-C&K o� � S'V(J �i CsiAIG, ,c/;?O ov I / 5 Z Ihc.1sgI CITY OF iEDMONDS 121 5TH AVENUE NORTH • EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (425) 771-0220 • FAX (425) 771-0221 Website: www6edmonds.wa.us DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT Planning • Building ° Engineering March 28, 2003 Ms. Suzan Matty 1152 Second Avenue South Edmonds, WA 98020 RE: Sewer Grinder Pump Installation Dear Ms. Matty: GARY HAAKENSON MAYOR After meeting with you at your house on March 20, 2003, we have researched our City design and construction standards regarding sewer grinder pump installations. We can find no City standard that is violated in the manner in which the grinder pump assembly at your house was installed or the ground around your grinder, pump is graded. Therefore, your request that the ground area around your grinder pump assembly and the area.between the short plat access road and your grinder pump be filled and graded is a private matter between you and Mr. Waite, the developer of the,,short plat who installed your grinder pump. Sincerely, AVIDEBERT, PE City Engineer lop Incorporated August 11, 1890 • McConnell, Jeanie From: Gebert, David Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 10:37 AM To: Bowman, Duane Cc: Rene, Don; Chrisman, Lyle; Gilbert, Danielle; McConnell, Jeanie Subject: RE: Ms. Matte 2nd Avenue Sidewalk Issue Duane, Thanks. I agree that it is time to have her put it in writing. We keep an eye out for her letter. Dave -----Original Message-7--- From: Bowman, Duane Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 9:43 AM To: Gebert, David Cc: Chrisman, Lyle Subject: Ms. Matte 2nd Avenue Sidewalk Issue Importance: High Dave/Lyle, Spoke with Sue Matte this morning. She was very disappointed about the time schedule to move the walkway (I told her 90 days). She was also upset that I would not agree to move the southern -most No Parking sign to create a parking space for her. She acknowledged that she can park her car in the carport behind her home but wants a temporary parking space in her front yard to access her front door. She also wants to know who and when the short subdivision requirements were inspected and signed off and whether or not there are any outstanding items that are not completed. I told her to put her thoughts in writing and address them to you Dave for a response. Thanks, Duane Mar 01 01 01:52p Lyle-, H H Jaeger Co. SIGO-568-750G p.2 Fir hh) ��4-� ) IiS2 Z, ,J Ave S SI'MPLEX 820 GRINDER SYSTEMRot y Leber OUTDOOR PREPACKAGED WITH SQUARE GUIDE RAIL SYSTEM �JJo � !J� �� t�rw►Avw;a�,� ax-7Nel ,gij;e, A!axflt SOLID FIBERGLASS COVER WATERTIGHT "QWIK BOX" RECEPTACLE & ALARM CONNECTIONS STAINLESS STEEL FLOAT HOOK 1 /8" 7X 19 302 STAINLESS STEEL LIFTING CABLE 3/8" X V 416 STAINLESS STEEL PULL ROD 2" ELECTRICAL PVC PIPE 1 1/4" NPT BRASS 24" 2" GROMMET SEAL DISCONNECT FITTING CAST IRON ANGLEARM BRACKET 4" CAST IRON INLET HUB 1 1/4" PVC SLIP X SLIP (FIELD INSTALLED) BALL VALVE 1 1/4" BULK HEAD DISCHARGE FITTING 1 1/4" PVC SCH 40 HIGH LEVEL PIPE AND FITTINGS ALARM FLOAT 60" 1 1 /2" 5Q. GUIDE RAIL 1 1/4" FEMALE NPT 304 STAINLESS STEEL 16 GA. CAST IRON CHECK VALVE CAST IRON MOUNT BRACKET GALVANIZED DISCHARGE PIPE CAST IRON LOWER STOP PUMP CONTROL 6r "ON - OFF" FLOAT � FIBERGLASS BASIN FIBERGLASS ANTI -FLOTATION FLANGE CAST IRON RAIL BASE PLATE 24" . 1 1 , 1 1 1 1 1 SK1670 Complete System Includes: Part No. Description 820-0011 230 Volt,1 Ph, 2 HP Automatic 820 Grinder Pump 10-0623 Indoor/Outdoor Alarm (Not Shown) 10-0580 Qwik Box Connection 33-0186 24" X 60" Basin, Cover, Rail System 39-0031 8' SS Lifting Cable 39-0069 1' Pull Rod 10-0661 Weight & Bracket Assembly APPROXIMATE WEIGHT: 390 LBS. m Mar 01 01 01:52p H B Jaeger Co. 360-568-7506 p.2 Lyle- & f7w Ll 1/3-13 "1 SI'MPLEX 820 GRINDER SYSTEM (�a y tA1e 6,e OUTDOOR PREPACKAGED WITH SQUARE GUIDE RAIL SYSTEM (POMP -� -7 - Y5.9 SOLID FIBERGLASS COVER WATERTIGHT "QWIK BOX" RECEPTACLE & ALARM CONNECTIONS STAINLESS STEEL FLOAT HOOK 1 /8" 7X 19 302 STAINLESS STEEL LIFTING CABLE X 1' 416 STAINLESS STEEL PULL ROD 2" ELECTRICAL PVC PIPE 1 1/4" NPT BRASS 24" 2" GROMMET SEAL DISCONNECT FITTING CAST IRON ANGLEARM BRACKET 4" CAST IRON INLET HUB 1 1/4" PVC SLIP X SLIP (FIELD INSTALLED) BALL VALVE 1 1/4" BULK HEAD DISCHARGE FITTING 1 1/4" PVC SCH 40 HIGH LEVEL PIPE AND FITTINGS 60" ALARM FLOAT 1 1/2" SO. GUIDE RAIL 304 STAINLESS STEEL 16 GA. 1 1/4" FEMALE NPT • CAST IRON CHECK VALVE CAST IRON MOUNT BRACKET 1 1/4" GALVANIZED DISCHARGE PIPE CAST IRON LOWER STOP PUMP CONTROL 6� "ON - OFF" FLOAT FIBERGLASS BASIN FIBERGLASS ANTI -FLOTATION FLANGE CAST IRON RAIL BASE PLATE 24" --� SK1670 QtL 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Complete System Includes: Part N Description 820-0011 230 Volt, 1 Ph, 2 HP Automatic 820 Grinder Pump 10-0623 Indoor/Outdoor Alarm (Not Shown) 10-0580 Qwik Box Connection 33-0186 24' X 60" Basin, Cover, Rail System 39-0031 8' SS Lifting Cable 39-0069 1' Pull Rod 10-0661 Weight 8 Bracket Assembly APPROXIMATE WEIGHT. 390 LB/S. % r 0 G fIa -1 C.4 ,U M + TO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT ATTN DON FIENE DATE 12 DECEMBE R 2001 FROM Stephen Waite RE S-01-159 1152 2nd Avenue South Water Availability Stephen Waite 111 Elm Street Edmonds, WA 98020 425.774.5533 (daytime) RECEIVED DEC 1 2. 2001 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Dear Don, I would like to request from the City a "Certificate of Water Availability" for the subject property. if the certificate does not include pertinent engineeringadata such as fire flow, peak. flows, etc. could you please forward this information Your efforts and courtesy in this matter are greatly appreciated. Resp ully, _ Steve Waite 4#1EMORANDU M ii- Date: November 28, 2001 To: File From: ave Gebert, City Engineer Subject: S-01-159, 1152 2"d Ave S., Sidewalks On November 26, 2001, Steve Waite asked me at the counter to reconsider whether the City will require installation of sidewalks on his short plat at 1152 2°d Ave S. He feels the site conditions are such that sidewalks should not be required. I explained the factors we consider in deciding whether to require sidewalks and that we are presently drafting a written policy statement to clarify the City policy. I told him l: would look into it and get back to him. On November 28, 2001, Don Fiene and I visited the site. There are existing sidewalks on both sides of the street on Elm Street from 3`d Ave to 2°d Ave. There are existing sidewalks in front of the property immediately to the north of and on the same side of the street as the subject property. Thes6 sidewalks continue to the north to the end of the cul-de-sac. At the end of the cul-de-sac, there is a walkway that continues on. Although the property in front of 1152 2"d Ave S does drop off somewhat to the west of the paved surface of the street, Don and I do not consider the slope to be so severe as to make sidewalk construction unreasonable. Therefore,. I agree with the Engineering Requirement for this short plat dated November 16, 2001 which requires the developer to `"construct five-foot wide concrete sidewalk to City standards along the entire property frontage". The developer should be required to construct sidewalks. I called Steve Waite on November 28 and left a voice mail advising him of my decision. City of Edmonds Development Services Department 3 CITY OF EDMONDS Development Services Department Engineering Division i T6 4241 FROM SCW6 1 1 /29/01 16: 56 P. 1 --w�:�•;w '^" ' Stephen Waite 11 -1 Elm Street Edmonds, WA 98020 RECEIVED 425.774.5533 (daytime) NOV 2 8 2001 ENGINEERING DIVISIONVIA�� F Twt- e- TO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT FAX No. 771.0221 ATTN DAVE GEBERT, CITY ENGINEER ' DATE 28 NOVEMBER 2001 FROM Stephen Waite, AIA�i,(.;� RE S-01-159 1152 2nd Avenue South Sidewalk Requirements Your memo dated November 28, 2001 Dear Dave, Thank you for taking the time to investigate in a timely manner my inquiry of required sidewalks at the subject property. Subsequent to our in person conversation today 1 have observed the adjacent sidewalks mentioned on your memo. All of these sidewalks and drive curb cut/aprons fronting on Elm Street as well as Second Avenue are of asphalt construction. None are of -cast in.place .. concrete. Therefore, as discussed with you today it is my understanding that a five foot.wide a$ghali sidewalk constructed to City.standards along the entire subject property frontage will be required. Your efforts and courtesy in this matter are greatly appreciated. Resp ully, _ p d4W ^o-f 7z& Steve Waite O� < c 7�a '0" /n �7 0 AL P. • ,r- �C55 }ALL op� EXEMPTION FROM CONTRACTOR REGISTRATION VERIFICATION FORM The undersigned property owner or contractor has applied for a building permit from the City of Edmonds and claims that he/she/it are exempt from providing contractor registration in accordance with the provisions of RCW 18.27. The property owner, by their signature below hereby verifies to the City of Edmonds that: ❑ Value of work under $500.00. The aggregate contract price of labor and materials and all other items required for the project is less than $500.00 and is not part of a larger opertation to be undertaken on the property. The person employed to do this work has not advertised nor otherwise put himself forward to the permittee to be a contractor or qualified to engage in the business of a contract. RCW 18.27.090(9). ❑ Work performed personally on own property. The undersigned verifies that all work done under this permit will be done by the permittee personally on his/her own property and that the improvements constructed on the property are not being undertaken with the intention and purpose of selling the improved property. ❑ Commercial property exemption. The permittee is the owner of commercial property and the owner's own employees will perform all maintenance, repair and alteration work on the property.. No work will be done by contract under the permit. RCW 18.27.090(13). ❑ Licensed architect, engineer, electrician or plumber. All work performed under this permit will be performed by an architect, civil or professional engineer, licensed electrician or licensed plumber operating within the scope of his or her license. RCW 18.27.090(14). ❑ General Contractor. The owner is the General Contractor for the project and is required to hire a minimum of two licensed subcontractors (unrelated building trades or crafts). The general contractor is responsible to verify all State licenses of subcontractor. RCW 18.27.010 THE UNDERSIGNED PROPERTY OWNER HEREBY VERIFIES THAT ALL INFORMATION PROVIDED ON THIS FORM IS TRUE AND ACCURATE TO THE BEST OF HIS OR HER KNOWLEDGE AND ACKNOWLEDGES THAT IF ANY OF THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ON THIS FORM IS FALSE, HE OR SHE UNDERSTANDS THAT THE BUILDING PERMIT WILL BE IMMEDIATELY REVOKED AND ALL FEES PAID FORFEITED. Dated this day of , 20 PROPERTY OWNER/PERMITTEE WITNESS: Print: LATEMMBUILDINGTORMS�-.= p contra oi"r regis verif form.& 03/28/01 RECEIVED -dam JAN032002 HAND DELIVERED DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 03 January 2002 Stephen Waite 111 Elm Street Edmonds, WA 98020 425.774.5533 (daytime) Mr. Meg Gruewell, City of Edmonds Community Development Services Edmonds, WA 98020 RE: S-01-159 Short Plat 1152 2nd Avenue South Appeal Dear Meg, There appears to be some confusion in regards to the appeal period. Please consider this an appeal of the Engineering Requirements for water system improvements. I am of the opinion that this is not a requirement. Please contact /pe .at your earliest convenience to discuss. Respectful Y ypm rs, 71177 01/ Stephen Waite • HAND DELIVERED 08 January 2002 Ms. Meg Gruwell, Senior Planner City of Edmonds Community Development Services Edmonds, WA 98020 • Stephen Waite 111 Elm Street Edmonds, WA 98020 425.774.5533 (daytime) RECEIVED JAN - 8 2001 RE: S-01-159 Short Plat PERMIT COUNTER 1152 2nd Avenue South Reconsideration: Engineering Requirements for Plats, Item #8 and Item E.1. Fire Hydrant replacement. Your 'Findings and Conclusions' letter dated 20 December 2001 Dear Meg, Please review my thoughts below in my request for reconsideration of the subject matter (replacing the 4° steel water line to 8° ductile iron on 2nd Ave. So. and hydrant replacement). It would be my contention that fire flow presently meets the Uniform fire Code requirements. Future water service demand would be minimal as this area is a fully developed single family residential zone and not a multi -family or commercial zone. tl I believe my request for reconsideration would not compromise fire safety. The impact of two new residential units on a fully; but lightly developed area is minimal. The City's request for water main replacement would be disproportionately burdensome relative to the benefits derived particularly since there is little or no chance to recover late comer fees. As this is a relatively older neighborhood, there could be concern about the physical condition of the main and perhaps the area may already be in the capital improvements plan. Your courtesy and efforts in this matter are appreciated. RespNcTff ully, Stephen Waite Is TT a 0%a a fir. - .�MEMORANDUM III.. Date: January 24, 2002 To: Meg. Gruwell, Senior Planner Via: Dave Gebert, City Engineer From: Lyle Chrisman, Engineering Program Manager /,, Subject: Review of Steve Waite's reconsideration request on Engineering plat requirements to upgrade the City water main and install a fire hydrant under Short Plat S-01-159 I received your letter along with Steve Waite's letter requesting reconsideration of the Engineering plat requirement to replace the existing four -inch City water main on' Second Avenue South with eight -inch and replace the fire hydrant. Eight -Inch Water Main Under Section 20.75.085D of the Edmonds Community, Development Code (ECDC), the City Engineer, as the person or body approving the engineering requirements for the subdivision, has the authority to require public improvements such as storm drainage, water main, sewer, sidewalks, road widening and other improvements for the public good as part of the plat development. The decision to require the developer to upgrade the water main. was based on the fact that the City's adopted Water Comprehension Plan indicates this area to have insufficient fire now because of the size of the existing main and identifies a requirement to upsize the line. The Fire Department has confirmed that fire now is insufficient in this area. The existing water main on Second Avenue South is programmed for replacement by the City in 2004. As a matter of policy, all water mains replaced per the Comprehensive Plan are to be a minimum of eight inches. However, per ECDC 19.75.120, when water main replacement by private development is required as a condition of subdivision approval, the water main replacement is to be accomplished by the City, with the property owner paying the cost equivalent to the cost of installing a six inch ductile iron water main. After reviewing Mr. Waite's letter with the City Engineer and Assistant City Engineer, we have concluded that we will modify our previous decision and require Mr. Waite to, as a minimum, replace the existing four -inch water main with new eight -inch water main only from the south end of Mr. Waite's property to the point of connection to the existing eight -inch water main near City of Edmonds the north end of Mr. Waite's property. Pursuant to ECDC 19.75.120, the City will:payfor the material cost difference between six-inch water main and eight -inch water main. Therefore, at Mr. Waite's option, he can satisfy this requirement by either: 1. Replacing the four -inch water main with eight -inch water main, with the City reimbursing him for the material cost difference between six-inch and eight -inch ductile iron water main; or 2. Paying the City an amount equivalent to the cost of replacing the four -inch water main with six-inch ductile iron water main, with the City to accomplish the replacement of the four -inch water main with eight -inch water main in 2004 as presently programmed. Fire Hydrant The. engineering requirement to replace the fire hydrant at Second Avenue South and Elm' Street was based upon the requirement for Mr. Waite to upsize the water main all the way to Elm Street. Since we are modifying the requirement to require replacement ain of the water monly to the south end of Mr: Waite's property, we will modify our previous decision and will not require Mr. Waite to replace the fire hydrant. The City will plan to replace the' hydrant as part of the 2004 Water Main Replacement project. 00 00 28 January 2002 Hearing Examiner Community Development Services City of 'Edmonds 121 5th Avenue North Edmonds, WA 98020 RECEIVED Stephen Waite 111 Elm Street JAN 2002 Edmonds, WA 98020 PER/CCU TER 425•774.5533 (daytime) REEEIVED 6" JAN 2 8 2002 PERMIT COUNTER RE: S-01-159 Short Plat n 24 January o2002 APPEAL OF RECONSIDERATION PROJECT PPLICANT: APPELLANT:Stephen Waite (owner) 111 Elm Street,, Edmonds,WA City„ of Edmonds Hearing Examiner, The-City's reconsideration response states that tC� ons for Year 201fire flow in peak inure area. This .claim is based on computer modeling: prole to demands, not on present or near future demands. The City' ncommitment me olv n t ongoing replace the subject water: main-. in the year 2004 is based strictly upo 9 9 repair and maintenance program throughout the entire city. In a December 12, 2001 letter to the Engineering Department (attached) the Applicant requested fire flow data which was not provided. Sub the fire flow s- c raver Its ytion with the Assistant City Engineer, the applicant was told that sufficient The Applicant has requested this data which is to be researched. and hopefully produced on or about 29 January 2002. Applicant maintains that fire flow currently meets the Uniform e it Cod ( 00 The pp Code. he gallons per minute) as adopted by the Edmonds Community seets fire uppression standards, applicant also submits that the exi d in the neaing rmain future. It should be noted that replacement supply and access currently a of the 4" line in front of the subject parcel with an Swill stiline l will not iavereprov a 4already sufficient fire flow since a major portion of the loop The City's attempt to regulate through this request portma n system by the upon the Applicant than what is placed upon he existing water development of two houses. ATTACHMENT 2 • I Date: 25 February, 2002 To: Meg Gruwell, Senior Planner From: Lyle Chrisman, Engineering Program.Manager Subject: Appeal of the City's reconsideration letter dated January 24, 2002, by Steve Waite on Engineering Requirements for Short Plat (S-01-159) We have reviewed Steve Waite's letter of appeal to our letter of reconsideration dated January 24, 2002 with regard to the plat improvements and consider his letter complete. Our response to his January 28, 2002, letter will be forthcoming. City of Edmonds 11Edmondsfile\DATAIUSERSIch6smanldvrw1sp101-159memo-appeal.doc 11hc.189"1 April 1, 2002 CITY OF EDMONDS 121 5TH AVENUE NORTH • EDMONDS,,WA 98020 • (425) 771-0220 • FAX (425) 771.0221 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT Planning • Building • Engineering Mr. Steve Waite 111 Elm Street Edmonds, WA 98020 RE: Appeal of Conditions of Approval of Short Subdivision File S-2001-159 Involving Water System Improvements Dear Mr. Waite: GARY HAAKENSON MAYOR During our meeting on March 27, 2002, you and Mr. Gifford asked how we detennined that the Edmonds Community Development Code and other City standards require the upsizing of the water main on 2°a Avenue South as a condition of approval for your short subdivision. Enclosed is a written summary of the rationale for our determination that we have prepared to help answer your question. Please don't hesitate to call Don Fiene, Lyle Chrisman, or me at 7710220 if you have further questions. Sincerely,., 1i DAVID K. GEBERT, P.E. City Engineer Cc: Rick Gifford Meg Gruwell Don Fiene Lyle Clnisman r • Incorporated August 11, 1890 • Sister Citv Hekinan..lanan HAND DELIVERED RECEIVED 10 April 2002 APR 10 2002 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Mr. Dave Gebert, PE Edmonds City Engineer Edmonds Community Development Services Engineering Department 121 5th Avenue No. Edmonds, WA 98020 RE: Engineering Determination -File # S-01-159 Dear Dave,. Stephen Waite 111 Elm Street Edmonds,WA 98020 425.774.5533 (daytime) Thank you for your letter dated April 01, 2002 describing in greater detail the rationale for your determination. I also appreciate the detailed cost information that Lyle Chrisman - supplied to me on the same date confirming the in -lieu -of fee that would be charged by the City if I opted not to install the up sized line now, but to make a payment instead. This would be a total for the short plat of $ 5,080 in order to satisfy the conditions stated in the short plat approval, as it has been modified by the City. However, I would still maintain that there are inconsistencies in the Comprehensive Plan, as a draft guideline, and a direct relation to the adopted Fire Code. Other than a theoretical model, there still remains no evidence that the subject waterline is not capable of supporting the provisions of the Fire Code and that mitigation is a requirement. I prefer the approach that you outlined to Rick Gifford, namely a restrictive covenant on the parcels to the fire area maximum for square feet at 1,000 gallons per minute ( currently 3,600 square feet of fire area). As.you suggested to Rick, a condition to any development beyond that area would require the up sizing to 6" lines, payment of a fee in lieu, or reimbursement of the City's installation cost, depending on whether or not the up sizing. was complete at that time. If one or both of the "two property owners desires to exceed this, he would be liable to. pay for one half of the in -lieu -of fee quoted by engineering staff. I feel this deals fairly, with this existing property and does not expose the City to risk or undermine the existing service. Thank you for your courtesy and understanding in this matter. Respectfully, lc,14C Stephen Waite, Applicant/Appellant cc: Mr. Rick Gifford *OECEIVED 18 April 2002 Mr. Ron McConnell City of Edmonds Hearing Examiner Edmonds City Hall 121 5th Avenue No. Edmonds, WA 98020 RE: Short Plat # S-01-159 Appeal of Water System Requirements Mr. McConnell, APR 18 2002 ENGINEERING DIVISION In review of the Edmonds Community Development Code and the 1995 Comprehensive Plan no language can be found that specifically mandates the Engineering Department to require water line replacement in all circumstances as a condition of subdivision. The city has stated that one of the purposes of the subdivision ordinance is to " facilitate adequate provisions for water, utilities, sewerage, storm drainage,:..and other public requirements". (ECDC 20.75.020). However, there has been no showing that there exists inadequate provision for water supply. The city's review criteria for subdivision states that improvements, such as water lines, May be required ( ECDC 20.75.085 D.1). Although the ECDC does have provisions for replacement and/or installation standards, the City has not demonstrated that there is a need or public benefit to be derived from water line replacement for the subject property in order for those subsequent stated provisions to be applied. The 1995 Water Plan does not establish specific standards. Like the Comprehensive Plan, it serves as a general guideline, for the planning of the City's overall land use and development program including necessary infrastructure. It should be noted that this area is essentially built out and that the Comprehensive Plan states that there will not be significant changes in the pattern of land use in the city ( Plan at 111-1). Of importance, it acknowledges that "many factors including building size, construction, type and use effect [sic] fire flow requirements," and identifies "criteria for fire protection" that were used in evaluating the City's water system. These "criteria" are set forth on page V-4 of the 1995 Water Plan. For example, 1,500 gpm @ 20 psi is identified as the general criteria for RS- zoned (single family) property in the City. However, specific enforceable requirements for fire flow are set forth in the 1997 Uniform Fire Code, specifically approved and adopted by the City, three years after the 1995 Comprehensive Plan (ECDC Section 19.75.000(A) ("City Fire Code"). The City has maintained that this area has insufficient fire flow as a reason for requiring water line replacement. They have scheduled this water line for replacement in 2004 as part of an ongoing repair and maintenance program. The City has developed a draft computer model projection for its water system, including fire flows and system pressure. The model does state an excess of fire flow for the subject water line relative to the City Fire Code. 4 !M *0 waits/page 2 Appendix III -A, Division III of the City Fire Cede establishes specific fire flow requirements for buildings. Subsection 5.1 specifies minimum fire flow of 1,000 gpm for single-family dwellings not exceeding a fire area of 3,600 square feet. (attached) Again based on the City's own draft computer simulations, the fire flow at Second Avenue and Elm Street where the subject property is located exceeds this code requirement. The City cannot require a standard for development different from ,that stipulated in its own development regulations. Only if larger homes were proposed for the subject property might the City be entitled to mandate upsizing of the water line to increase fire flow. In previous discussions I had offered and was prepared to put a restrictive covenant on residence size pursuant to the Fire Code provisions, that is limiting the fire area to 3,600 square feet or, if exceeded, then replacing the water line to 6" or pay an in lieu of fee of $5,080 as established by the city. This seemed to be a reasonable solution. Finally, through such regulations as the Growth Management Act infrastructure should be utilized to its greatest efficiency. The City has not demonstrated that the present water line is not capable of supporting two new houses nor has there been a showing of a compromise of safety. The City's attempt to regulate through their requirement is a disproportionate burden placed upon the Applicant than what is placed upon the existing .water main system by the development of two houses. The Comprehensive Plan, the Water Plan and the Development Code do not specifically mandate the City's requirement in this circumstance. Respectfully yours, Stephen Waite Applicant/Appellant 111 Elm Street Edmonds,WA 98020 425.774.5533 1997 UNIFORM FIRE CODE APPENDIX 111-A of) J C, • • 11 • Division III FIRE PROTECTION APPENDIX III -A FIRE -FLOW REQUIREMENTS FOR BUILDINGS (See UFC Section 903.3) SECTION 1 — SCOPE The procedure determining fire -flow requirements for buildings or portions of buildings hereafter constructed shall be in accord- ance with Appendix III -A. Appendix III -A does not apply to struc- tures other than buildings. SECTION 2 — DEFINITIONS For the purpose of Appendix III -A, certain terms are defined as follows: FIRE AREA is the floor area, in square feet, used to determine the required fire flow. FIRE FLOW is the flow rate of a water supply, measured at 20 psi (137.9 kPa) residual pressure, that is available for firefighting. SECTION 3 — MODIFICATIONS 3.1 Decreases. Fire -flow requirements may be modified down- ward by the chief for isolated buildings or a group of buildings in rural areas or small communities where the development of full fire -flow requirements is impractical. 3.2 Increases. Fire flow may be modified upward by the chief where conditions indicate an unusual susceptibility to group fires or conflagrations. An upward modification shall not be more than twice that required for the building under consideration. SECTION 4 — FIRE AREA 4.1 General. The fire area shall be the total floor area of all floor levels within the exterior walls, and under the horizontal projec- tions of the roof of a building, except as modified in Section 4. 4.2 Area Separation. Portions of buildings which are separated by one or more four-hour area separation walls constructed in ac- cordance with the Building Code, without openings and provided 'with a 30-inch (762 mm) parapet, are allowed to be considered as separate fire areas. 43 Type I and Type II-F.R. Construction. The fire area of buildings constructed of Type I and Type II-F.R. construction shall be the area of the three largest successive floors. SECTION 5 — FIRE -FLOW REQUIREMENTS FOR BUILDINGS 5.1 One- and Two -Family Dwellings. The minimum fire flow and flow duration requirements for one- and two-family dwellings having a fire area which does not exceed 3,600 square feet (344.5 m2) shall be 1,000 gallons per minute (3785.4 Umin.). Fire flow and flow duration for dwellings having a fire area in excess of 3,600 square feet (344.5 m2) shall not be less than that specified in Table A-III-A-1. EXCEPTION: A reduction in required fire flow of 50 percent, as approved, is allowed when the building is provided with an approved automatic sprinkler system. 5.2 Buildings other than One- and Two -Family Dwell- ings. The minimum fire flow and flow duration for buildings oth- er than one- and two-family dwellings shall be as specified in Table A-III-A-1. EXCEPTION: A reduction in required fire flow of up to 75 per- centi as approved, is allowed when the building is provided with an ap- proved automatic sprinkler system. The resulting fire flow shall not be less than 1,500 gallons per minute (5677.5 Umin.). s� 1-301 APPENDIX III -A 1997 UNIFORM FIRE CODE TABLE A -III -A -I -MINIMUM REQUIRED FIRE FLOW AND FLOW DURATION FOR BUILDINGS FIRE AREA (square lest) FIRE FLOW .\ (galI er mimrle . 0.0m for m= Try FI-R. ►p T 01 OneOoHeR R tune -A �. �p T III•Nt N Type V•Nt Mt n loc. FLOW DURATION 0-122,700 0-12,700 0-8,200 0-5,900 0-3,600 11500,) 22,701-30,200 12,701-17,000 8,201-10,900 5,901-7,900 3,6014,800 1,750 30,201-38,700 17,001-21,800 10,901-12,900 7,901-9,800 4,801-6,200 2,000 38,701-48,300 21,801-24,200 12,901-17,400 9,801-12,600 6,201-7,700 2,250 2 48,301-59,000 24,201-33,200 17,401-21,300 12,601-15,400 .7,701-9,400 2,500 59,001-70,900 33,201-39,700 21,301-25,500 15,401-18,400 9,401-11,300 2,750 70,901-83,700 39,701-47,100 25,501-30,100 18,401-21,800 11,301-13,400 3,000 83,701-97,700 47,101-54,900 30,101-35,200 21,801-25,900 139401-15,600 3,250 97,701-112,700 54,901-63,400 35,201-40,600 259901-29,300 15,601-18,000 39500 3 112,701-128,700 63,401-72,400 40,601-46,400 29,301-33,500 18,001-20,600 3,750 128,701-145,900 72,401-82,100 46,401-52,500 33,501-37,900 209601-23,300 4,000 145,901-164,200 82,101-92,400 52,501-59,100 37,901-42,700 23,301-26,300 4,250 164,201-183,400 92,401-103,100 59,101-66,000 42,701-47,700 26,301-29,300 4,500 183,401-203,700 103,101-114,600 66,001-73;300 47,701-53,000 29,301-329600 4,750 2039701-225,200 114,601-126,700 73,301-81,100 53,001-58,6W 32,601-36,000 5,000 225,201-247,700 126,701-139.400 81,101-89,200 58,601-65,400 36,001-39,600 5,250 247,701-271,200 139,401-152,600 89,201-97,700 65,401-709600 39,601-439400 5,500 271,201-295,900 152,601-166,500 97,701-106,500 70,601-77,000 43,401-47,400 59750 295,901-Greater 166,501-Greater 106,501-1159800 77,001-83,700 47,401-51,500 6,000 4 " 115,801-125,500 83,701-90,600 51,501-559700 6,250 125,501-135,500 90,601-97,900 55,701-60,200 6,500 " 135,501-1459800 97,901-106,800 60,201-64,800 6,750 " 145,801-156,700 106,801-113,200 64,801-69,600 7,000 " 156,701-167,900 113,201-121,300 69,601-74,600 7,250 " 167,901-179,400 121,301-129,600 74,601-79,800 7,500 " 179,401-191,400 129,601-138,300 79,801-85,100 7,750 " 191,401-Greater 128,301-Greater 85,101-Greater 8,000 ,'types of construction are basea upon the nuuatng L.Aae. 2Measured at 20 psi (137.9 kPa). See Appendix III -A, Section 2. j I 1-3w I ` .1ICAGO TITLE INSURANCE CONTAA .,J30 HOYT AVENUE, EVERETT, WA 98201 PLAT CERTIFICATE Order No.: 372246 Certificate for Filing Proposed Plat: In the matter of the plat submitted for our approval, this Company has examined the records of the County Auditor and County Clerk of SNOHOMI SH County, Washington, and the records of the Clerk of the United States Courts holding terms in said County, and from such examination hereby certifies that the title to the following described land situate in said SNOHOMI SH County, to -wit: SEE SCHEDULE A (NEXT PAGE) VESTED IN: STEPHEN C. WAITE AND JOYCE K. YAMANE, HUSBAND AND WIFE EXCEPTIONS: SEE SCHEDULE B ATTACHED CHARGE: $2 00.00 TAX: $16.6 0 Records examined to SEPTEMBER 4, 2001 at 8 : 0 0 AM BRENDA MCCOY Title Officer (425)259-8215 PLATCRTAftMgOM CHICAGO TTTLE INSURANCE COWP_ . I PLAT CERTIFICATE SCHEDULE A (Continued) Order No.: 372246 LEGAL DESCRIPTION . LOT 9, BLOCK 4, SOUTH PARK ADDITION TO EDMONDS, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF, RECORDED IN VOLUME 8 OF PLATS, PAGE 13, RECORDS OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON; EXCEPT THAT PORTION THEREOF CONVEYED TO JAMES R. SEEBER BY WARRANTY DEED RECORDED MAY 8, 1953, UNDER AUDITOR'S FILE NUMBER 1061735, WHICH EXCEPTED PORTION IS PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: ALL THAT PORTION OF LOT,9,.BLOCK 4, SOUTH PARK ADDITION EDMONDS, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF, RECORDED IN VOLUME 8 OF PLATS, PAGE 13, RECORDS OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON, LYING WEST OF THE CREEK MEANDER LINE; SAID CREEK.(UNNAMED) BEING THE CREEK THAT FLOWS IN A NORTHERLY DIRECTION ACROSS SAID LOT 9. THIS TRACT OF LAND IS FURTHER DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 9; THENCE APPROXIMATELY 100 FEET ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 9 TO A POI,NT OF JUNCTION WITH THE CREEK MEANDER LINE; THENCE ALONG THE CREEK MEANDER LINE A SOUTHERLY DIRECTION TO THE SOUTH.LINE OF SAID LOT 9; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 9 A DISTANCE OF APPROXIMATELY 70 FEET TO THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 9; THENCE NORTHERLY A DISTANCE OF 132 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH, STATE OF WASHINGTON. PIAATCRM/RnA OM CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY PLAT CERTIFICATE SCHEDULE B Order No.: 372246 This certificate does not insure against loss or damage by reason of the following exceptions: GENERAI. EXCEPTIONS: A. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing in the public records or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof but prior to the date the proposed insured acquires for value of record the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment- B. Rights or claims of parties in possession not shown by the public records. C. Encroachments, overlaps, boundary line disputes, and any other matters which would be disclosed by an accurate survey and inspection of the premises. D. Easements or claims of easements not shown by the public records. E. Any lien, or right to lien, for contributions to employee benefit funds, or for state workers' compensation, or for services, labor, or material heretofore or hereafter furnished, all as imposed by law, and not shown by the public records. F. Liens under the Workmen's Compensation Act not shown by the public records. G. Any service, installation, connection, maintenance or construction charges for sewer, water, electricity or garbage removal- H. General taxes not now payable; matters relating to special assessments and special levies, if any, preceding or in the same becoming a lien. I. Reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof, Indian tribal codes or regulations, Indian treaty or aboriginal rights, including easements or equitable servitudes. J. Water rights, claims, or title to water. K THIS REPORT IS ISSUED AND ACCEPTED UPON THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THE LIABILITY OF THE COMPANY SHALL NOT EXCEED ONE THOUSAND DOLLARS($1000.00). PLkMRis/FM&/a9 CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE CONTt_ . f v . PLAT CERTIFICATE SCHEDULE B (Continued) Order No.: 372246 EXCEPTIONS A 1..NO SEARCH HAS BEEN MADE AS TO PROPERTY TAXES AND ASSESSMENTS. PROPERTY TAXES AND ASSESSMENTS WILL BE SEARCHED UPON REQUEST. H 2. DEED OF TRUST TO SECURE AN INDEBTEDNESS: GRANTOR: STEPHEN C. WAITE AND JOYCE K. YAMANE, HUSBAND AND WIFE TRUSTEE: EVERGREEN TITLE INC. BENEFICIARY: CASCADE BANK AMOUNT: $ 350,000.00 DATED: APRIL 27, 2001 RECORDED: MAY 4, 2001 RECORDING NUMBER: 200105040692 LOAN NUMBER: 5001038775 c THE AMOUNT NOW SECURED BY SAID DEED OF TRUST AND THE TERMS UPON WHICH THE SAME CAN BE DISCHARGED OR ASSUMED SHOULD BE ASCERTAINED FROM THE HOLDER OF THE INDEBTEDNESS SECURED. n 3. THE COMPANY'S LIABILITY FOR THIS REPORT IS LIMITED TO $1,000.00. THIS REPORT IS BASED ON THE COMPANY'S PROPERTY RECORDS, AND NO LIABILITY IS ASSUMED FOR ITEMS MISINDEXED OR NOT INDEXED IN THE PUBLIC RECORDS, OR FOR MATTERS WHICH WOULD BE DISCLOSED BY AN INQUIRY OF THE PARTIES IN POSSESSION OR BY AN ACCURATE SURVEY OR INSPECTION OF THE PREMISES. THIS REPORT AND THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION GIVEN HEREIN ARE BASED UPON INFORMATION SUPPLIED BY THE APPLICANT AS TO THE LOCATION AND INDENTIFICATION OF.THE PREMISES IN QUESTION, AND NO LIABILITY IS ASSUMED FOR DISCREPANCIES RESULTING THEREFROM. THIS REPORT DOES NOT REPRESENT EITHER A COMMITMENT TO INSURE TITLE, AN EXAMINATION OF, OR OPINION AS TO THE SUFFICIENCY OR EFFECT OF THE MATTERS SHOWN, OR AN OPINION AS TO THE MARKETABILITY OF TITLE TO THE SUBJECT PREMISES. a KME/JW PiATCRTBIAUWOM E DMN 23 . 22 • 20 32 O• 0 0 o m _ N Ftheapproximate h is for purpose of showing � general location of theCn O ' without actual survey anditle assumes no liability In � connection with the same I wc I /9 IN 0 I 3/ /8 /7 1 27 /6 54 (7043) r /5 /4 X Q C i- _ I 7 /4 ~ V 9 /2 /0 ERBEN DR. / /0 Q 9 N �� 2 3 Q R B 4 of 11 �Z j�11pF-- tr/ I per Lr2 �91 I a, oZ I / IVK. c 1 1 04 o 3 1 OL �__ 89o►t b293 I� I 00 I 1 03 i OZ e OL 7 2 c-r2D3 =-f S P ( -180� 85) 0 - - - - 4 r : 0Z 9 L 00 o I k LT o 02 1 Bi! I 3 I 60. 0 1 -W vF-; -- -43 C i Qf - iZ I (Cc cn I I I I 032Cz C2 LA r I I ---- - - - - -- --I I off' 01 i -- . 02 c 3 01 AN 2 - RR P A - O 5 i n I 2 I �' ° 5 - - - %'A 5 �(69 0 0 4e,4 . I Bis } -- ,t R K i �---------- I o jglo r "IL47 v r I O3 ( I 6($ I C eS S i f-- - - - - -J L--- L Q 3 I N,I I o\11.1I [t A K p3 r 0 3 T) _ —� 01 O4 -- I-------- r 4 Z 1 / 03 1 O2 I - I � C N 03 O .S60 OL- - - - - - - M 1 ��J7 "oz 1 9 -- 1 OZ 01 1 Isi I 01 04 -I QL 104 1 I I �I 03 OI 02. /O I A'g pr I$ /O I I Of 11 /0 9 03 P// Fr 1 1, o z l L-- SOOTHPAF�KADD- TO EDMONDS (58 winrc. OF. ED4o w :- St. Purpose of Checklist: CITY OF EDMONDS ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), chapter 43.21C RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An environmental impact statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with . probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. Instructions for Applicants: This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly,. with the most precise information known, or give the best description you can. You must answer each question accurately. and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if a. question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not know" or does not apply". Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can assist you. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels o land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there . may be significant adverse impact. NOTE: Projects generating new traffic -will be required to submit a Traffic Study prepared by a licensed Professional Civil Engineer. Specific requirements for the Traffic Study may vary depending upon the project, and will be provided by the City Engineer upon request. Please contact the Engineering Division at 425-771-3202 for specific siudy requirements. City review of the Traffic Study may require assessment of the "Development Project Peer Review" fee of $45 plus the cost of the review. Use of checklist for nonproject proposals: Complete this checklist for nonproject proposals, even though questions may be answered "does not apply." IN ADDITION; complete the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (part D). For nonproject actions, the references in the checklist to the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposer," and "affected geographic area," respectively. A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Name of applicant: � P� I� N r vr, tT6 3. Address and phone number of applicant and Page 1 of 24 sepa checklist - public.doe:4.18.2001 4. Date checklist prepared: LO.1 5. Agency requesting checklist: City ofEdmonds 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): (STAFF COMMENTS) 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. /W (STAFF COMMENTS) 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this, proposal. (STAFF COMMENTS) 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affectin% the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. .k-0 (STAFF COMMENTS) L� Page 2 of 24 sepa checklist - public.doc:4.18.2001 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. • (STAFF COMMENTS) 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to. describe certain aspects of your proposal. You. do not need to repeat those answers on this page. a, 505DjUI,� �JC/57� 44466 Iar7o 7hf/16G ti sly �� ff1V1/,Y Acts 1d&-Ar 71,A-e- /t ri r l r-?�(S7'MA AAU661- 5/7-6 % 0-1-) 27. ;7�8 S.F. (STAFF COMMENTS) 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. z 2-�iyc s��►, (STAFF COMMENTS) Page 3 of 24 scpa checklist - public.doc:4.18.2001 TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT s ID • ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. Earth a. General description of the site (circle one) Fla rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other: (STAFF COMMENTS) b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? �- (STAFF COMMENTS) C. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, mucky If 9° JOIXow the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. �P- *--w - <,-6u ROM (STAFF COMMENTS) d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe'/ ----- &0 (STAFF COMMENTS) Page 4 of 24 sepa checklist - public.doc.4.18.2001 e. Describe the purpose, type and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. w,#Y 'zb A- s tz oe of ass (STAFF COMMENTS) f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. �d (STAFF COMMENTS) g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? (STAFF COMMENTS) • h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: (STAFF COMMENTS) 2. AIR a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. (STAFF COMMENTS) Page 5 of 24 sepa checklist - public.docA.16.2001' b. Are there any off -sites sources of emissions or odor that may effect your proposal? If so, generally describe. A Z6 • (STAFF COMMENTS) C. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to the, if any: (STAFF COMMENTS) 3. WATER a. Surface: (1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. W« w • (STAFF COMMENTS) (2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. (STAFF COMMENTS) (3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. (STAFF COMMENTS) U Page 6 of 24 sepa checklist - public.doc:4.18.2001 (4). Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. alb (STAFF COMMENTS) (5) Does the proposal lie within a 100'-year tloodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. (STAFF COMMENTS) (6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. • (STAFF COMMENTS) b. Ground: (1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. (STAFF COMMENTS) Page 7 of 24 sqm checklist • public doc:4.18.2001' (2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals...; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of thesystem, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be • served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. A' • (STAFF COMMENTS) C. Water Runoff (including storm water): (1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. (STAFF COMMENTS) (2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. (STAFF COMMENTS) d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: V& R G all! S Y 31t o S r-AE3 57*IG7`oK- ©PU F(C e 5 - (STAFF COMMENTS) E P� Page 8 of 24 sepa checklist - public.doc:4.18.2001 4. Plants a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other:. evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other: shrubs — pt,- grass pasture crop or grain wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bulrush, skunk cabbage, other: water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other: other types of vegetation: (STAFF COMMENTS) b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? 15�C-70-y(3 �i��Lt// , (STAFF COMMENTS) C. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. (STAFF COMMENTS) • Page 9 of 24 sepa checklist - public.doc:4.18.2001 Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other materials to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: (STAFF COMMENTS) 5. Animals a. Check or circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other: mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: (STAFF COMMENTS) b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. /Y A (STAFF COMMENTS) C. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. /�,tJ� (STAFF COMMENTS) Page 10 of 24 sepe checklist - public.doc:4.18.2001 d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: • (STAFF COMMENTS) 6. Energy and Natural Resources a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. (STAFF COMMENTS) Alk b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. A1D (STAFF COMMENTS) C. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: (STAFF Page l 1 of 24 sepa checklist - public.doc:4.18.2001 7. Environmental Health a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and • explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so describe. (STAFF COMMENTS) (1) Describe special emergency services that migh�t/be required. /e (STAFF COMMENTS) ® (2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: (STAFF COMMENTS) b. Noise (1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? 7vr IYOX56 j C-11140V /�04t rA (" �y M ilk )�i (STAFF COMMENTS) • sepa checklist - puhlic.doc:4.18.2001 Page 12 of 24 (2) What types and levels.of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. • (STAFF COMMENTS) (3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: (STAFF COMMENTS) 8. Land and Shoreline Use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? • (STAFF COMMENTS) b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. /JQ (STAFF COMMENTS) Page 13 of 24 sepa checklist - public.doc:4.I83001 C. Describe any structures on the site. 5� - Fig (STAFF COMMENTS) d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? (STAFF COMMENTS) What is the current zoning classification of the site? ® (STAFF COMMENTS) What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? j�;S/�IKZZP 'L (STAFF COMMENTS) g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master plan designation of the site? (STAFF COMMENTS) • Page 14 of 24 sepa checklist - public.doc:4.18.2001 h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. (STAFF COMMENTS) i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? (STAFF COMMENTS) j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? • (STAFF COMMENTS) k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: b,U A - (STAFF COMMENTS) 1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: (STAFF COMMENTS) Page 15 of 24 sepa checklist - public.doc:4.18.2001 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income • housing. /u (STAFF COMMENTS) b. Approximately how many units, if any would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. (STAFF COMMENTS) ® C. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: (STAFF COMMENTS) 10. Aesthetics a. 0 What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principle exterior building material(s) proposed? (STAFF COMMENTS) Page 16 of 24 sepa ch=Uist - puesc.duc:4.1e.2001 b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? A/6Jliff (STAFF COMMENTS) C. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: (STAFF COMMENTS) 11. Light and Glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? (STAFF COMMENTS) b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? (STAFF COMMENTS) C. What existing off -site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? tlWg (STAFF COMMENTS) Page 17 of 24 wp cnakGn - wuuc.aoa4. is.zoor d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: V N� (STAFF COMMENTS) 12. Recreation a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? 19/f AK (STAFF COMMENTS) b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreation uses? If so, describe. (STAFF COMMENTS) C. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: (STAFF COMMENTS) Page 18 of 24 Kroa,uu pu6sedoaa.isaoo� 13. Historic and Cultural Preservation a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers• known to be onor next to the site? If so, generally describe. AJO (STAFF COMMENTS) b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. (STAFF COMMENTS) C. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: • 0 N� (STAFF COMMENTS) 14. Transportation a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. <�6aoo) b) PIVIIt-Z5 k&&P '5&ZULU� AJelilf l De(J75 (STAFF COMMENTS) Page 19 of 24 sepa checklist - publiadoc:4.18.2001 b. Is site currently served by public transit? stop? (STAFF COMMENTS) If no, what is the approximate distance to the nearest tra C. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate' N (STAFF COMMENTS) ' w roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not d. Will the proposal require any ne including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). 10 (STAFF COMMENTS) e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportations� If so, generally describe. (STAFF COMMENTS) •4 Ml Page 20 of 24 f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. (STAFF COMMENTS) g. Proposed measures.to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: (STAFF COMMENTS) 15. Public Services • a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. JAI AX64 deb t (STAFF COMMENTS) b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any: (STAFF COMMENTS) Page 21 of 24 sepa checklist - public.doc:4.18.2001 16. Utilities •a. C' urrently available at the site: electric Ovate ty natural as, , use servi elep one s . ary sewer, s tic system, other: (STAFF COMMENTS) b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. AIA7, 424-<-, — 5/io . C1711f. P (STAFF COMMENTS) is C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. Signature of Proponent Date Submitted • Page 22 of 24 sepa checklist - pubGc.doc:4.18.2001 D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (do not use this sheet for project actions) • Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the list of the elements of the environment. When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms. 1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise? Proposal measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life? • Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: Page 23 of 24 sepa checklist - public.doc:4.18.2001 4. is - Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: 5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: 7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. • How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered , species habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands? Page 24 of 24 sepa checklist - public.doc:4.18.2001 CITY OF EDMONDS 121 5TH AVENUE NORTH • EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (425) 771-0220 • FAX (425) 771-0221 Website: wwwdedmonds.wa.us DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT Jh c 189p Planning • Building • Engineering July 14, 2003 Ms. Suzan Matty ,1152 2°d'Avenue;,Sout, t Edmonds,- WA-98'020 GARY HAAKENSON MAYOR RE: Request for Public Records Regarding Sidewalk Removal and Replacement Dear Ms. Matty: This is .in response to your Request for Public Records dated July 10, 2003, which requests the following: "...all city costs to remove and replace the sidewalk at 1152 2nd Ave S. Edmonds 98020. Additionally ... all documents relating to the decision to remove and replace the sidewalk ... to include inter -office memos, e-mail . communications, all inclusive communications. ...a. complete record of City expense related to sidewalk removal and replacement." Enclosed is a spreadsheet indicating the amount of the contractor's invoice the City has approved for the removal and replacement of the sidewalk at 1152 2°d Avenue South. Pursuant to Chapter 42.17 RCW, the City is required to provide public documents in response to public inquiries but is not required to create reports to answer inquiries. Accordingly, we are researching our files and compiling documents that satisfy your request. Due to the volume of records that will need to be reviewed, we estimate that it will take approximately three weeks to complete our review, and that we will be able to provide any additional documents that may exist that are responsive to your request by approximately August 1, 2003. Sincerely i DAVID K. GEBERT, PE City Engineer Cc: Sandy Chase, City Clerk Incorporated August 11, 1890 Cictor (-ifii - T-4otrinar, JAnnn CHANGE ORDER #6 1 City of Edmonds, Washingtion 2nd Ave S Contract Price Totals to date Previous Payments FINAL Schedule G: Proposed Walkway relocation at 1152 2nd Ave S. 4/17/03-6123/03 TOTAL PRICE QUANTITY TOTAL PRICE 4/17103-6123103 QUANTITY TOTAL PRICE ITEM DESCSR/PTION UNITS . QUANTITY UNIT PRICE TOTAL PRICE QUANTITY NO. DLRS/CENTS DLRS/CNTS DLRS/CNTS DLRS/CNTS DLRS/CNTS 1 Mobilization - LS 1 $ 600.00 $ - 600.00 1.00 $ 600.00 0 $ - 1 $ 600.00 2 Remove acp walkway SY 63 $ 10.00 $ 630.00 63.00 $ 630.00 0 $ 63 $ 630.00 3 Remove 16" concrete vent. curb LF 134 $ 5.00 $ .670.00 134.00 $ 670.00 0 $ 134 $ 670.00 4 Widen roadway (includes layout, SF 636 $ 3.75 $ 2,385.00 636.00 $ 2.385.00 0 $ 636 $ 2.385.00 excavation, 518" CSTC and compaction) 5 2" Cl "B" acp TN 12 $ 150.00 $ 1,800.00 17.00 $ 2,550.00 0 $ 17 $ 2.550.00 6 Install 16" concrete veit. curb LF 120 $ 21.00 $ 2,520.00 120.00 $ 2,520.00 0 $ 120 $ 2,520.00 7 Construct 5' wide asphalt walkway LF 105 $ 15.00 $ 1.575.00 105.00 $ 1,575.00 0 $ 105 $ 1,575.00 (includes 4" - 518" cstc and 2" CL "G" acp . 8 Construct 5' wide concrete steps LS 1 $ 723.00 $ 723.00 1.00 $ 723.00 0 $ 1 $ 723.00 9 includes forming and rebar embankment - CY 107 $ 10.00 $ 1.070.00 32.83 $ 328.30 0 $ - 32.83 $ 328.30 TOTAL $ 11,973.00 $ 11,981.30 $ $ 11,981.30 "?C. 18913 CITY OF E D M O N D GARY HAAKENSO I 1 .7 MAYOR 121 5TH AVENUE NORTH • EDMONDS, WA98020 • (425) 771-0220 • FAX (425) 771-0221 Website: www dedmonds.wa.us DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT Planning • Building • Engineering October 1, 2003 Ms. Suzan Matty 1152 2nd Avenue South Edmonds, WA 98020 RE: Asphalt Drive/Private Access Road for Short Plat at 1152 2°d Avenue South Dear Ms. Matty: This is in response to your letter dated September 24, 2003 concerning the asphalt drive/private access road for the short plat at 1152 2nd Avenue South. We have reviewed the approved civil plans for the subject short plat. They show an asphalt thickened edge on one side of the asphalt drive, the south side only. This is in compliance with the City's standard design details for residential access roads/drives (3-4 lots) with cross slope in one direction. The purpose of the thickened edge is to channel storm. water to the storm drainage system catch basin which, in the approved civil plans for this short plat, was indicated to be installed on the south side of the asphalt drive. During construction, the developer opted to install the asphalt drive with cross slope to drain to the north, rather than the south, and to, install the asphalt thickened edge and catch basin on the north side of the drive. This is perfectly acceptable, complies with City standards, and was approved by the City. In reviewing the as -built drawing, I note that it shows the asphalt thickened edge on the north side only, as actually, installed. However, after discussing the drawings with you yesterday, I can see how the as -built drawing is not perfectly clear, since one of the arrows depicting the edge of the asphalt pavement incorrectly points to the edge of the easement, rather than the edge of the pavement. Nonetheless, the asphalt drive/private access road as installed does comply with City standards, which require a thickened edge on only one side. Therefore, the City intends to take no further action on this issue. Sincerely, DAVID K. GEBERT, PE City Engineer Incorporated August 11, 1890 Sister City - Hekinan, Japan MEMORANDUM i01, f Date: To: From: ,Subject: July 12, 2001 File CA-01-91 Star Campbell, Planning Division Study Complete 0 The attached-stream_classification and delineation completes the required Critical Areas Study for 1152 2"d Ave. South Parcel # 5820 004 009 01. City of Edmonds cQ Planning Division PWTECENWRONMWTAL Delivering smarter solutions October 3, 2001 Mr. Stephen Waite, President Waite Architects 324 Main Street Edmonds, Washington 98020-4105 Re: Willow Creek Critical Areas Study Pentec #12130-13 Dear Stephen: On August 2, 2001, 1 visited your property located at 1152 - 2"d Avenue S in Edmonds, Washington, for the purpose of conducting a critical areas study. Based on this field visit and previous work Pentec has performed on this portion of Willow Creek, I conclude that this reach supports resident cutthroat trout. No anadromous fish can access this area because of several blockages to upstream migration. Thus, the stream is classified as a Category 2 stream pursuant to the criteria of the Edmonds -Community Development Code; -Section - 20.15B.060(A)(4), and it requires a 25-foot buffer and a 15-foot building setback from ordinary high water (20.15B.120). While on the site, I staked out the ordinary high water line based on indications of where high waters had.left a mark upon the soil. These marks have been accurately portrayed on the drawing provided by Sky Valley Surveyors. This stream is protected from adverse effects of site development by the nature of the ravine through which it flows. For example, the stream flows along the west bank of the ravine bottom, leaving from a few to as much as 15 feet between the wetted stream edge and the toe of the east side of the ravine. The ravine is well -vegetated on both sides and little, if any, shading would be lost by clearing outside of the 25-foot buffer provided that large (>10-inch) trees identified within the 15-foot building setback zone are retained. Please do not hesitate to call if you require any additional information regarding this assessment. Sincerely, PENTEC ENVIRONMENTAL JONATHAN P. HOUGHTON, PH.D. Senior Principal, Marine/Fisheries Biologist jon.houghton®pentecenv.com Attachment: Figure A Division of Hart Crowser, Inc. 120 Third Avenue South, Suite 110 Edmonds, Washington 98020-8411 Fax 425.778.9417 Tel 425.775.4682 00130\013\waitecas I.doc v.Com Anchorage Boston Chicago Denver Fairbanks Jersey City Juneau Long Beach Portland Seattle LEGEND R.ACO6(r a STAxE Of F{ CRmCAL AWAS CGNS&TANT lY' 90CATM OEVIAMON ROM DOi® CFM EM —ID— STOW DRAINAGE LINE SEWSUINE —._ NATERLNE _._ ELEM C." .co SETTOI CEAMMIr 0Q" NATSR VALVE ® NATERMUM fmw twr lTl� GAS VALVE ew LRILMPOE / OTR TOBIIIAE am OTC TREMM r®ESTAL / west creek CITY 1 PARK . � Pine Street NORTH ELM tow\woo of. r7 / wGodwdy -VICINITY MAP - -_ 25.00' L 15.00' 3UPFER BUILDING 0 SETBACK s7'oeea�♦ ♦ I i DETEwnoN i SYSTEM i ♦ our1' ♦ ♦LE. o �', Y: � aa0,1D 1d � ♦ � 16' Cedar �ZN low 8 2.00 FOOT EASEMENT FOR a` Fr ACCESS ROADWAY CATCH BASIN COLLECTOR PIPE. east creek edge --gr Cedar I I SPECS SUBMITTED AT asdefi-.Aky ,'T ., I LOT D FINAL APPROVAL) critictj•areas `, �, / / ROADWAY consultant I /DETENTION. ON SITE 7' HeHemlock(see report)... . % SYSTEM 0 (Sff Ra3oRr) 19" Fir (in surnp) I t , 9' Hemlock o....._. ........... ILI S' Fr SQ`50' W I I L, --- - — --- --- --- ---- --- ---- -- G4 ;.30' Cedar ; 8 : 63.2T ,N-SS—,•.1N.....— .$ - --------------------- 7 Hemlock r= 34' Fir r- - LOT'C - 12' Hemlock ON SITE O T DETENTION SYSTEM 101 HdN " `� \r LOT'C' dk Nt DbL McPb . %` � 20' Cedar stwnp) \ \ 0 T . 17- Hemlock DETENTION, //SYSTEM T1 '40, �1 t 1 \ 1 1 E6. , r r r PLANNING INFORMAT N EXISTING ZONING: RS•6 CRITICAL AREAS FILE No. CA - 01 - 91 j PROPOSED LOT COVERAGE Lot'A' coverage: 1301 S.F. EXISTING BUILDING (LOTA) : (ex'srg. bidg.saves 8 deck) Lot 'N (proposed) : 62M S.F. Lot A' percentage: 20.9% (35% allowed) LOT SIZE SUMMARY Lot'N skze (mail): 6,229 S.F. Lot V size: 8,723 S.F. Lot IV Shea: 9,570 S.F. Lot IC' stm (portion): 946 S.F. Roadway Access 2,290S.F. GROSS AREA: 27,750 S.F. (+!-) or 0.637 ac. GRADING REQUIREMENTS 43 CU.YDS. ADDED TO DasnNG DRIVEWAY IMPERMEABLE SURFACES LOT'A' IMPERMEABLE SURFACE: EXEMPT FOR EXISTING HOUSE LOT'B' IMPERMEABLE SURFACE: 3= S.F. (PROPOSED DESIGN)' PAVED ACCESS $QSED DESIGN) SUBTOTAL DETENTION SYS.: LOCATED ON LOTS' 5.593 S.F. LOT'C' IMPERMEABLE SURFACE: 3,00D BY. (PROPOSED DESIGN) EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE I I I Elm Street (Stephen Waite/ Joyce Yamane) 0 Is- Hemlock 1132 2nd AVG.. Fill grading (M Marshall added 10 existing • 16' Fir 186.50' N 890 52' 20" W 2r Fir I driveway = 43 -- -- K: ye 14 it b ABACK W 68.W N S9 ° 57 20' 16• FirO O 19' R? 2D" Fir 5. re o SET• '�, 44• Ceda G— T Hemloek '•.,` 1 I BACK I ,� W t� cV LOT 'B' � o 1 rill. o - ~ EXISTING 20 FOOT ASPHALT APPROACH Nile 5oso'w, I I I I'5.00. 15.00 I xx.... -' ----- -'- REAR SETBACKI I I W _0 g ABATE SEPTIC TANK. = GRINDER CONNECT TO CITY SEWER. It 1 a6'Ceda ��- -----=--------------- C 10' Fir 203.96 N 890 59 50" W 60.00, �o I TYPICAL TURN AROUND DETAIL f 16.00' ? AND JURISDICTIONAL APPROVAL. NO WARRANTY OR GUARANTEE IMPLIED OR EXPRESSED. V!rl ID- �r I �O �Q I 1 I I LOT 'A' I 1 1 1 (STING HOUSE t I 1152 2nd AVE. SOUTH V toot Bave 1 L—� �— .............i ------—�-e� .-----�Cla wall -----------------------------------------------I 82.37' N 89' 50' 50" W I I �TBACI( — — axj5ftwood It ,, sasnNG SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE 1 T54 SECOND AVE SO. (Gerald Pomor"yee Engstrom) ExanNG RETAINING WALLS IEXISTING EDGE I OF STREET W 0 0 O O O O �Z I co n (V - —cn-1 Ir- co . ad MAIN PARCEL DESCRIPTION ASSESSOR'S TAX PARCEL ID 0 5= - 004 - 009 - 0109 BENCHMARK- Exist g. SSMH located 1' S. of S. boundary line (TBM S. Rim SSMH) s®s m .msm �v mamm n.r� R. a®Q mom ®rIm® hex •. u1. 10 a®ta•A rrte m uN„a, sRa mare ,anm u BASIS OF BEARINGS: ASSUMED +a she .mnm v rn .. sea ...a a a m Rmmm em.. Rm®o n m s®. m�mm a wr . v run. she u. ®ts v aoo¢w ta.�. DATUM: ASSUMED ■m�u mrrerrm AamA ua 10:.. ova ova v um u OWNER: Stephen C. Waite Joyce K. Yamane ra:awo c ,o .a,,,.m moos v sa ar ,, 111 EEim Street ,sea .,ao >a am mmR 1m R om,mAr auala m m wn ua v Edmonds, WA 98020 SITE ADDRESS: 1152 2nd Avenue South ,ma � . maao v w ,her m w .hen v men. Edmonds, WA 9802D ems a m men m mom:) rnn m Ramo,m. GROSS AREA: (+/-) 27,758 S.F. TEN FOOT SEPARAnoN WATERS LINE TO SEWER LINES O ,hem a Rr P.P. I NOTE gas and water rm e knoim to exist tmexact location is I G W not located on 1 GRINDER LINES TO TO CITY SS SIDE CONNECTION. (GRAVITY FLOW IN R.O.W.) O I '^ W IW D I0 W O IZ UJI U Z O U tW 60.00' I R.O.W. EXISTING ASPH. • PAVING IN R.O.V _ I 11a9 ww • I I ,o TS••• (a,Na 9W BENCHMARK 113.50' TSM S. Rim SSMH Sky Valley Surveyors SHORT PLAT BOUNDARY, TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY and DRAINAGE PLAN FOR: STEPHEN WAITE IN NW 1/4, NW 1/4 OF SECTION T. NO. 9/27101 I ( NORTH 1" =20.00' dg. CITY OF EDMONDS Development Services Department Engineering Division r T � i vet ra�ti 16 p0 asp -/ 1152 2nd Ave. S. (existing house) CV O N V := 17 r :fir !��'� ► { ^ r' i T-0 ! t li}4gt1ii14}1 9 jemergemcy Z vehicle turnaround per plat • %' / r, • ., -. -N ro i ' , ier Plump nberiCU r I � axi C.B. , + :( - - top of sewer stubs to top of road 6'-9" 3'-9" m to curb I to exist'g. asph edge PK Nail thC. 1golo CITY OF E D M O N D S GARY HAAKENSON MAYOR 121 5TH AVENUE NORTH • EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (425) 771-0220 • FAX (425) 771-0221 Website: www.oi,edmonds.wa.us i DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT Planning • Building • Engineering March 28, 2003 Ms. Suzan Matty 1152 Second Avenue South Edmonds, WA 98020 RE: Sewer Grinder Pump Installation Dear Ms. Matty: After meeting with you at your house on March 20, 2003, we have researched our City design and construction standards regarding sewer grinder pump installations. We can find no City standard that is violated in the manner in which the grinder pump assembly at your house was installed or the ground around your grinder pump is graded. Therefore, your request that the ground area around your grinder pump assembly and the area between the short plat access road and your grinder pump be filled and graded is a private matter between you and Mr. Waite, the developer of the short plat who installed your grinder pump. Sincerely, VID K. GEBERT, PE City Engineer Incorporated August 11, 1890 9 City of Edmonds Critical Areas Determination o Applicant: Stephen Waite Determination # CA-01-91 Project Name: . Permit Number: Site Location: 1152 2"a Ave. S. Property Tax Acct M 5820 004 009 Ol Project Description: Non -Project Specific Determination: Study Required: During review and inspection of the subject site, it was found that the site contains or is adjacent to a critical area including a stream pursuant to Chapter 20.15B of the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC). Based on this finding, prior to submission of any development permit, you will be required satisfy the requirements of ECDC 20.15B by completing the following: • Stream The site investigation has shown that your propertyis adjacent to a stream that runs roughly parallel to the rear (west) property line. Based on the above findings, a Critical Areas Study is required to determine the hydrology of the area and to delineate the boundaries of the stream and identify its buffers. In addition, the study will determinde whether or not salmonids, migrating fish, use this reach of the adjacent stream. If they do, a 50 foot buffer and a 15 foot building setback is required from the top of the stream bank. If salmonids do not use this portion of the stream, a 25 foot buffer and a 15 foot building setback is required from the top of the banks. The required qualified critical areas consultant needed to perform the study shall be a specialist in botany, fisheries, wetland biology, and/or hydrology with a minimum of two years' field experience with wetlands and/or streams in the Pacific Northwest. This part of the required Critical Areas Study shall be performed as a three party agreement with the city selecting the consultant and the property owner or applicant paying the fees as required in ECDC 20.15B.140(D). The applicant may suggest qualified professionals for the City's approval. The qualified critical areas consultant shall perform the following: 1. Classification of the stream pursuant to the criteria established in ECDC Section 20.15B.060(A)(4) and (5). 2. Delineate the edge of the stream on the site. • 3. State any mitigating measures appropriate to preserving and protecting the stream. After the qualified critical areas consultant has delineated the stream boundary, a surveyor licensed by the State of Washington must perform the following: .1. Delineate the required buffer (see ECDC 20.15B.120.(A) and 20.15B.130.(C)). 2. Delineate the required building setback from the buffer (required setback is 15 feet). • 3. Create a map showing the buffer and the building setback. The Land Surveyor is not required to enter into a three party contract. If the results of the Critical Areas Study determine that the lot may not be developed, the applicant may apply for a Reasonable Use Exception and Variance pursuant to ECDC 20.15B.170(A) and 20.15B.040(C)). If the property owner wishes to apply for a specific development permit which they feel would not impact the Critical Areas located on,the site, they may submit their proposal :to the Planning Department for review. If the Planning Department finds that the proposed development permit will not adversely impact a Critical Area or its buffers, a conditional waiver may be issued on a project by project basis. Name Signature Date O Cited sections of the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) can be found on the City of Edmonds • website at www.ci.edmonds.wa.us. • K Critical. Areas Checklist' CA File No: U-TT of A l r. Site Information (soils/topography/hydrology/vegetation) Site Address/Location % 1 21VV 4U Property Tax ANumber:-- 6 ccount 3. Approximate Site Size°(acres or square feet): 4. Is this site currently developed? _gyes; no. If yes; how is site developed? ' 1: 0 aGGE F } M I by 5. Describe the general site topography. Check allthat 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 over a horizontal distance of 33 to 66-feet). 7. • 8. Steep: grades of greater than 30% present on site (a vertical rise of 10-feet over a horizontal distance of less than 33-feet). �DL pi i A Other (please describe): LAT r u o-rl V C mj K +/- ► 30% Site contains areas of year-round s'tan water: ill Q : Approx. Depth Site contains areas of seasonal star _ding water: ; Approx. Depth: What season(s) of the year? Site is in the floodway floodplain of a water course. 9. Site ro}ntains a creek or an area where water flows across the grounds surface? Flows are year-round? L��7 Flows are seasonal? (What time of year? ), 10. Site is primarily: forested 4, meadow ; shrubs ; mixed urban landscaped (lawnshrubs etc) , 11. Obvious wetland is present on site: jam_ Critical Areas Checklist.&0.19.2001 City of Edmonds Development Services Department's Planning Division Phone: 425.771.0220 Fax: , 425.771.0221 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 the application 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). Date 7. Critical Areas Fle #: Critical Areas-.Checkil yk6.- .00 Date;Mailed to Abolicant: A property owner, or his/her authorized 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.., Please submit a vicinity map; along with the signed copy of this form to assist Citystaff in finding and locating the specific piece of property . described .on this form. In addition, • the., applicant shall include other pertinent information (e.g. site-- plan, topography map, etc.) or studies in conjunction with this Checklist to assistant staff in completing their preliminary assessment of the site. The undersigned applicant, and his/her/its heirs, and assigns, in consideration on the processing of the application agrees to release, indemnify, defend and hold the City of Edmonds harmless from any and all damages, including reasonable attorney's fees, arising from any action or infraction based in whole or part upon false, misleading, inaccurate or incomplete information furnished by the applicant, his/her/its agents or employees. • By my signature, I certify that the information and exhibits herewith submitted are true and connect to the best of my knowledge and that I am authorized to file ap lication on the behalf of the owner as listed below. ZX SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT/AGENT DATE Property Owner's. Authorization By my signature, I certify that I have authorized the above Applicant/Agent to apply for the subject land use application, and grant my permission for the public officials and the staff of the City of Edmonds to enter the subject property for the purposes of inspection and poste attendant to this application. SIGNATURE OF OWNER --t A Name W G�_(VI r- Street Address �Y►oN�S 20 S1�21b City State. ''// Zip Telephone: (� 2 C✓) 7?41 Email address (optional): Critical Areas Checklistdoc/3.19.2001 Name Street Address 5704A� City State Zip Telephone: !;;�9_3 3 Email Address (optional): • DA Zone H S.E. 1/4 SEC. 26 T.27N.. RA E_w M i no --- ■ va 21801 (� 2/9o1 D C 21827 ❑ II 112 21900 21900 4 I l 2$ i 21 1130 ► M11A c 21901 Q 1130 y 1127 1136 120 II - SEA LA CO OAD 2Z 11:32. 1139 113e �4 219/9 a /142 113 X tits ❑ $ _ifl iH3 //99 u9?9 ❑ F 1154 94 M M /166 /16S n e a M t 22007 P2p21� cr (� 22000 N O q 22021 2� 0 WHIT COMB �, a° a Q 22100 H 0 22109 0♦ 22201 1 0 22115 h 0 22222 S . Z2230 22212 QQ RZ226 O �2223 22320 ua 3oo � ary N a V o o 224300 .1 p �•� c o w o N OD P �p 22438 ° r .° IL z2g26 p e zz41 s 4 N 22505 � 3 22630 $ g 0 22439 3 N o % 8 z263o o $ 2 00 o s V o Q 0at y M $ o 22805 y2-140 a 2272Z o Y 4 a 22819 H Q 2 1❑ - W1 C7 3 c Q / - li; 0 0 2829, Critical Areas Checklist CA File No: U-rT A l Site Information (soils/topography/hydrology/vegetation) 1. Site Address/Location: 1 CJ 2 (/e']`/1 2. Property Tax Account Number: 8 2,0 — 00 4- 3. Approximate Site Size (acres or square feet): 2 6, 4. Is this site currently developed? yes; no. If yes; how is site developed? 10 a L-c- FA M l LY M5 i i9bt c.( 5. 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 over a horizontal distance of 33 to 66-feet). Steep: grades of greater than 30% present on site (a vertical rise of 10-feet over a horizontal distance of less than 33-feet). pL�,►1-A Other (please describe): f (�A`r F U O-Cl V C"56t<, )kp r 4l- 1306 o 9-k! �'e V- A 6. Site contains areas of year-round standing water: Q ; Approx. Depth: 7. Site contains areas of seasonal sttaanding water: ; Approx. Depth: What season(s) of the year? 8. Site is in the floodway floodplain of a water course. 9. Site cl�o tains a creek or an area where water flows across the grounds surface? Flows are year-round? Yon Flows are seasonal? (What time of year? ). 10. Site is primarily: forested �_; meadow ; shrubs ; mixed_; urban landscaped (lawn,shrubs etc) r 11. Obvious wetland is present on site: Uo Critical Areas Checklist.doc/3.19.2001 OFhED,LjO� ` City of Edmonds O Development Services Department _ Planning Division Phone: 425.771.0220 Zqc I gq0 Fax: 425.771.0221 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 the application 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). Date Received: */' —/ -0 City Receipt #: Critical Areas File #: Critical Areas Checklist Fee:_ $45.00 Date Mailed to ADDlicant: A property owner, or his/her authorized 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. Please submit a vicinity map, along with the signed copy of this form to assist City staff in finding and locating the specific piece of property described on this form. In addition, the applicant shall include other pertinent information (e.g. site plan, topography map, etc.) or studies in conjunction with this Checklist to assistant staff in completing their preliminary assessment of the site. The undersigned applicant, and his/her/its heirs, and assigns, in consideration on the processing of the application agrees to release, indemnify, defend and hold the City of Edmonds harmless from any and all damages, including reasonable attorney's fees, arising from any action or infraction based in whole or part upon false, misleading, inaccurate or incomplete information furnished by the applicant, his/her/its agents or employees. By my signature, I certify that the information and exhibits herewith submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and that I am authorized to file ' ap lication on the behalf of the owner as listed below. SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT/AGENT J DATE d YZ0 Property Owner's Authorization T—`— By my signature, I certify that I have authorized the above Applicant/Agent to apply for the subject land use application, and grant my permission for the public officials and the staff of the City of Edmonds to enter the subject property for the purposes of inspection and poste attendant to this application. �,IGNATURE OF OWNER • .9 I • Applicant: At Name I c Street Address t N)9" I5 City State Zip Telephone: Email address (optional): Applicant Representative: Name Street Address L-Ti2A((Jd5 tuo 9666210 City State Zip Telephone: Email Address (optional): Critical Areas Checklist.doc/3.19.2001 LOT APPROVAL STREET NAME L.A. Ball ADDRESS 115 - 2ad ave ADDRESS OF PROPOSED . BUTILDING LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOTS_ BLOCK 4 ADDITION South Park.Add. TYPE OF USE _ Res. NO. OF BEDROOMS 2 SIZE OF LOT 1321x 185' SOURCE OF DRINKING -WATER: Public Supply Yes Private -Well a. SURFACE DRAINAGE �. Is disposal field site well drained? "'Yes 2. Any water course ( stream, drainage ditch, etc.) through'.site? vPg in "lie rear • �• ' ..14 19 Any heavy slopes in field area? No 20 Will present topsoil in field area be removed,dr graded before field tiles are installed? No 3.. Will any fill material be used in the disposal' field 'siti- Ye ti yes' es' I . how much? -- c. SOIL CONDITIONS 1. Has a hole at least 4 feet deep been dug in the disposal field area to deter- mine the type of soil present? ypq 2. After hole is dug record the soil conditions at the following depths. Record as sand, gravel, clay, packed sand, loam, etc.) 12 inches 30 inches z8 inches 36 inches 24 inches 48 inches Sand. 3. Any ground water encountered before reachinga depth of.4 feet?^ If so at what depth?.' d. WATER TEST... A simple water test will show how well this soil will -drain or percolate water. To perfonn".this--test: ,A 1. Dig hole at least 36 inches deep.' Use a shovel_or'post hole digger — size of., -hole makes no difference —only depth. 2. Fill -hole with water. Now let all water run out of hole. This soaks+ the ground and will give a more accurate reading. 3. Again pour water in hole to a•height of 12 inches from the bottom. Let water run out until there is just 6 inches from bottom left in hole. 4. Note how many minutes it takes for this last 6 inches to.seep away. Record this time below.... Number of minutes for last 6.-inches to seep away, To 'Rapid To Cheek'' 5. Divide. this time .by 6 to obtain the. rate per inch - _.." 6. Date water test was performed ` I hereby certify .the above information- to be`"c'orrect' and the above tests were performed by me as 'prescribed, c/ Signed Addre'�s__Box 222 Edmonds ash NOTE: Aseptic tank permitis issued on the basis of the above information. If there, are any changes or alterations, in the above stated soil�conditions.,it .may. ; result, in the, installaiion, being rejected 'at "thd time of inspection. Percolation Rate and Required Absorption Area. For single Family Dwellings. - Aevllat�on Rave (Timers Lne`al: feat of 4 inch file mnu�"'R'ty'es fo_ r water to fall using trench with width of one >hi)� 3 15 ma n nnnn k. 5 115 `t 190 ++ 12 250� ++ 15 265, +r 30 .285 : �+ Over 30 375 �+ 'Soil Unsuitable I: DONNA L. BRESKE, P.E. 14712 Meadow Rd. Lynnwood; WA 98037 Phone:425.-742-6386 Fax: 425-787-9330 STORM DRAINAGE DETENTION DESIGN FOR STEVE WAITE - LOT B LOT RESPO(\c.D _F0 CITY Pl_D1t_EW COMNMENz INCRE19SE IMPERVI0U5 AREA TO DATE: 3 - Z 8 - 02 REV16(6N #I : 5- 28-OZ RECEIVED MAY 2 g 20Q2 PERMIT COUNTER SITE: 1152 2°" AVE S. EDMONDS, WA 98020 o k- � O � - R �lIS I DID # = CL/JRI FY THK TOE UE7ekl TIOM PIPE To B EE LDCATED ON LOT "6 it Is 51 z es Fog RUNOFF FROM. THE- IMPERV IOuS fo-RG7�_s OF LOT , �e `i LOT "C "" AND 6CC ESS R06DI EMERGENCY UFHICLE T()RNARoUMb ; ol cl Id jADS REDUCER 4• /2 136" x I TYP. tp CS 02 T TOP - 8 IE (N) - 0— IE (E) - 45.6W N �VjO' SO- W SOLID Ll G .68' /LOT 'C' PROTECTIONS �r el" In CENTERLINE 0 .EASEMENT FOR ON -SITE STORM WATER DETENTION SYSTEM ON' LOCATED LOT W.' FOR LOTV AND ACCESS ROADWAY) NOT&-: INCOMING FLOWS VtXj ComV.P-YAlUca flPF- CAN BE CONNE-C-TC-D TO ''C84 ) ')R ce A- 21 - ti i N - / e--z- 6 7. 0 DONNA L. BRESKE, P.E. 14712 MEADOW ROAD LYNNWOOD, WA 98037 PHONE: 425-742-6386 FAX. 425-787-9330 ff It 57-F-og- LOT's `6 9- c- -'..C:B #1 TYPE 1-L ONTROL. STRUCTURE I -Ea P,0,01710k SOLID LOCKING L D �W PsT#". TOP - 89' INSTqLLATION IE (S,W) - 84.0 1 i.LF IZUDIAC" Jz 36"X12" REDUCER EXEND EMERW64GYTUANJ AROUND EASMEW LOT 'B' ON SITE DETENTION SYSTEM FOR, LOT V, % LOT VAND ACCESS ROADWAY EASEMENT Q JT JO LOT IOUTH Maw 20.00' ACCESS, V ITY, AND o"NAGYRASEMEhrr J a v N 8150' 5 s cctie_: J 11 -= .2 I- 11 Is 12023:D 73� TYPE i -L c8tz-2 CONTROi. TYPE 1-L.C�3 INSTALL 3&"X 12 ►, c8 #1 r EAU c � /IS HCAwAv, 091E A) r up6rp.= m f}S �KOW'� 'To �C~cU�AJr AIR-La(-K IN PIPE, (',� Li= v36t, -73' DONNA L. BRESKE, P.E. 14712 MEADOW ROAD LYNNWOOD, WA 98037 PHONE: 425-742- 6386 FAX. 425-787-9330 . TYPE 0(A A S k-17- 1- L a o SrEU v��IT� Ld 7 LOT & � pETE N7101\4 0 0;16 3 -28 -OZ LOT C+oNTRaZ-. STRUCTO OETAIL 6" Pvc To THE OUTFFi_[ NOTCH WEIF? 0ET1; I L b" PVC 3. EL= 67, 00 NOTC 14 W EI R FL' 6-1.0 Wl07-H-;o HEIGHT = 3.6 " 6," Pvc PIPe WITH NOTCH WEIR (o" PVC TEP V FVC PIPE I VL. __rl1 SECURC- WITH 4DtfESI VF-: DRILL Mo S "OP IFICE /N CENTER op— CRP pipe O.D. rr�ll I I miTl I end cap or plug , flow to second dispersal tre no h a o clean outw�e from pipe it necessary A `' v,0o I notched o � a W. a° 4" o r b" perfo raed p ipe laid fiatrlevel t grade board A Aa 2'X 2' notches p QpeI ' C B w/so lid corer (Ix kingj type I C 6 -0 influentpipa (maxdesign w/solidco�er ,? a ..o 4 flow _<0.5CFSper trench) o- aQ 1 q4 n, v clean outwte from pipe yT q° o flow to other PLAN b rant h ing C B's NTS as necessanv galvanized botls ., pipe O.D. � I 13' O._-C�1. 1'-0 Ie 1'0 2' x12" .ntY` s do- 2" grad pressure 'P ; o A� board notches 2" treaoedgrade d 0 9p perforamed board i, b ^ Capa v " 4 pipe, laid flat u NOTES: 4" x 4' sup port post c ; 4b ._clean fS54`e finest 1. Thistrench shall be constrtictd 9D p i'M' - 3/+"washed rock as to prevent point disc harge andbr erosion. r 2. Trenches matt be placed no closer fitter fabric than 50 feett one another. (100 feet 15% max forllavccntrollwaterquality alongflowlinej treatment in rural areas. 3. Trench and grade board must be level. A lign to fol low co nto ursof sit. SECTION A -A 4. Support post spacing as required by NTS soil conditions to ensure grade board remains level. Figure 5.2 Standard Dispersion Trench with Notched Grade Board. August 2001 Volume V — Runoff Treatment BMPs 5-5 ►0611N0 MAIM AND MATE . 180 STD DWG e•140 FOR DETAE.E) "4/1t0• SOLD BROOK USED FOR MAL ADA16TUENT TO ORATE. $' HIGH MAX. 0. Oh ". Ooholum RISER SECTION CLASS 4o0$ CONCRETE N 00NCAET! REDUCING TOP SLAB Was 400e oohcRE1! PRECAST BASE SECTION l0 WREMENT AT THE TOP OF THE SAN) 01, it. .y Snohomish County Public Works Snohomish County, WaehIngton 9.060 CATCH BASIN TYPE 1-L NOTES: t CATCH BASINS 70 BE CONSTRUCTED N ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM O 470 (AASHTO M 104) A ABTM O 91 UNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWN ,+ ON PLANS OR NOTED IN THE WSDOT/A►WA BPECFWATIONS. E. REINFORCING SHALL BE EQUIVALENT TO WELDED WIRE FABRIC HAVING A MINIMUM AREA OF 0.1E BOUARE INCHES PER FOOT. WELDED MARE FABRIC SHALL COMPLY TO ASTM A 407 IAABHTO M221). WIRE FABRIC SHALL HOT BE PLACED N THE KNOCKOUTS. B. THE BOTTOM OF THE PRECAST BASE SECTION MAY BE WINDED 4. PRECAST BASES SHALL BE FURNISHED WITH CUTOUTS OR KNOCKOUTS. KNOCKOUTS SHALL HAVE A WALL THICKNESS Of E MINIMUM. A. KNOCKOUTS MAY BE ON ALL 4 SIDES WITH MAXIMUM DIAMETER OF EO•. KNOCKOUTS MAY BE EITHER ROUND OR W SHAPE. PIPE TO M INSTALLED N FACTORY SUPPLIED KNOCKOUTS. : vx,� 0- KNOCKOUT OR CUTOUT HOLE 012E It EQUAL TO PIPM'OUTER DIAWTER PLUS CONCRETE INLET WALL THICKNESS. T. THE TAPER ON THE $DES OF THE PRECAST EASE NOTION AND RISER SECTION SHALL NOT EXCEED VY PER FT. S. CONCRETE INLET FRAME AND ORATE SHALL as N AdooADANo[ *rm ae8� THE WSDOTIAPWA SPECIFICATIONS AND MEET THE ATRENOTH'• )'J4i'4'vr�WP' REQUIREMENT$ OF FEDERAL SPECIFICATION RR•F-AID. MATNO SURFACES SHALL eE FINISHED TO ABSURS NON-ROCIINO Orri 0. FRAME AND ORATE MAY SE INSTALLED WITH FLANGE bOWN 'oR bAltVp Rij1. INTO RISER. ...,E I:� 1>;h8 1?t;�,i! 1ilTtMttJm► WSDOT/APWA PLAN 1-A + : s right. CITY OF EVERETT STD DWO 400.1 a r;ia'Ya '9URG' ? .. u . • ii18tDIBI Clt'.tr.. See Text Section 9-04 - j.• I: c ,'+m1 Approved by: County Road Enpineer pate 3 Z8 -02 S(TEE: i P-09" Lof 9 Area fr&n w%,tch Flo" Can be caFtvred i e% def rl pipe, 'O'r Poriw f4mk'bt� &s;, Ps Roadway A oc-ess Aw Tro-rh L: AREA S©(L- CROUP C F-$I 5TI NG C©N0,17-roN lree5 Secend 6r0wN+ A grwk, �:X¢stin9 Impervious 6rctu4 Drevewty 800 SF •01eAc ChJ = � 8j774 5F 7q 71 5F OrE 1 ELOPED CONDITION; f !�538 s F 946 st 2,2qo sF 87-7 7f Sr .201 A c �Xi��►n�q �rWi�: C/U =q0 Impervious; ffou6es l Dr'iveuzqsas I We,I1 A' Shcir-ed AccPr' 093 5F Lot .B ImpervioUS Z 5'00 ,sF - 1.0 fZ" /v4perv(Qvs ZZ03 5F Access Road i Turn• Rrwr4. ZM 0 5E CAf_ I �RR3 sF' Pervi-ous 81774 - (o''9 = I- 5F og I he C►' 1 f�al� 1�+P�iSIto �f �n Storm ever = Sheef . Floes/ 140 LF@ 14 Z1.5 7 )min Use TC (0 *t&( For deuefoped cerd(�C" L3/28/02 STEPHEN WAITE, LOT B MARCH 28, 2002 BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: A10OX NAME: 100 YR 24 HR EXISTING SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA.......: 0.20 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE....: TYPElA PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION....: 3.00 inches AREA..: 0.18 Acres TIME INTERVAL....: 10.00 min CN....: 81'.00 TIME OF CONC.....: 21.57 min IMPERVIOUS ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0.20 AREA..: 0.02 Acres CN..... 89.00' TcReach - Sheet L: 140.00 ns:0.4000 p2yr:. 1.50 s:0..1000 PEAK RATE: 0.04 cfs VOL: 0.02 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: AlOX NAME: YR FA 24 HR EXISTING SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA.......: 0.20 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs. RAINFALL TYPE.....: TYPElA PERVIOUS AREA - PRECIPITATION....: 2.00 inches AREA..:, 0.18 Acres TIME INTERVAL....: .10.00 min CN....: 81.100 TIME OF CONC.....: 21.57 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION-COEFF: 0.20 AREA...: - 0.02 Acres CN...... 89.00 TcReach - Sheet L: 140.00 ns:0.4000 p2yr:. 1..50 s::0.1000 PEAK RATE: 0.02 cfs VOL: 0-01 Ac-ft TIME: 490 min page 1 BASIN ID: A2X NAME: 2 YR 24 HR EXISTING SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA.......: 0.20 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE.....: TYPElA PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION......:.. 1.50 inches AREA..:. 0.18 Acres TIME INTERVAL--:- 10.00 min CN - .: 81.00 TIME OF CONC.....: 21.57 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0.20 AREA..: 0.02- Acres CN...... 89.00 TcReach - Sheet L: 140.00 ns:0..4000 p2yr: 1.50 s:.0.1000 PEAK RATE: 001fs VOL: 0.01 Ac-ft TIME: 490 min 0 3/28/02 page 2 STEPHEN WAITE, LOT B T G MARCH 28, 2002 BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: B100D NAME: 100 YR 24 HR DEVELOPED SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA.......: 0.20 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE.....: TYPElA PERVIOUS AREA PRECIPITATION....: 3.00 inches AREA..: 0.04 Acres TIME INTERVAL....: 10.00 min CN....: 86.'00 TIME OF CONC.....: 10.00 min IMPERVIOUS AREA ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0.20, AREA..: 0.16 Acres CN..... 98.00 PEAK.RATE: 0..11 cfs VOL: 0.04 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: B10D SBUH METHODOLOGY. TOTAL AREA........ RAINFALL TYPE.....: PRECIPITATION....: TIME'INTERVAL .... : TIME OF CONC.....:: ABSTRACTION COEFFr NAME: 10 YR 24 HR DEVELOPED 0.20 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs TYPElA PERVIOUS AREA 2.00 inches AREA...: 0.04 Acres 10.00 min CN....: 86.00 10.00 min IMPERVIOUS AREA 0.20 AREA..: 0.16 Acres CN..... 98.00 PEAK RATE: 0.07 cfs VOL: 0.03 Ac-ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: B2D SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA........ RAINFALL TYPE.....: PRECIPITATION.....:. TIME INTERVAL....: TIME OF CONC.....: ABSTRACTION COEFF: NAME: 2 YR 24 HR DEVELOPED 0.20 Acres BASEFLOWS:. 0.00-cfs TYPElA PERVIOUS AREA 1.50 inches AREA...: 0.04 Acres 10.00 min CN....: 86.00- - 1.00 min IMPERVIOUS AREA 0.20 AREA..: 0 16 Acres CN..... 98.00 PEAK RATE: 0.05 cfs VOL: 0.02 Ac-ft TIME: 470 min 3/28/02 page 3 STEPHEN WAITE, LOT B 91 MARCH 28, 2002 ---------------------- HYDROGRAPH SUMMARY PEAK TIME VOLUME HYD RUNOFF OF OF Contrib NUM RATE PEAK HYDRO Area cfs min. cf\AcFt Acres 1-A:ZX 0.006 490 .250 cf 0.20 2-RIQX 0.017 490 469 cf 0.20 3- R1GOX 0.044 480 997 cf 0.20 4-B20 0.052 470 817 cf 0.20 5-810 C 0.069 480 1157 cf 0.20 . 6 - E-leGo 0. 110 480 1855 cf 0. 20 11 --o 620 �k- 817 cf 0.20 12 0.016 690 1157 cf 0.20 13 0.044 550 1855 cf 0.20 3/28/02 STEPHEN WAITE, LOT B Lo page 2 MARCH 28, 2002 DISCHARGE STRUCTURE LIST COMBINATION DISCHARGE ID No. Cl Description: COMBINATION DISCHARRGE Structure: N1 Structure: Structure: 01 Structure: Structure: NOTCH WEIR ID No. N1 Description: NOTCH WEIR Weir Length: 0.1000.ft. Weir height (p): 0.3000 ft. Elevation 87.00 ft. Weir Increm: 0.10 MULTIPLE ORIFICE ID No. 01 Description:. ORIFICE Outlet Elev: 84.00 Elev: 83.50 ft Orifice Diameter: 0.6500 in. ...3/28/02 page 1 STEPHEN WAITE, LOT B 1-0-CC MARCH 28, 2002 ---------------------------- STORAGE STRUCTURE LIST UNDERGROUND PIPE ID No. P1 Description: DETENTION PIPE Diameter: 3.00 ft. Length: 72.00 ft. Slope...: 0.0050 ft/ft Ca I c u la+e Qe crecse in QiFe L r, 401 1_L r�rc;P ��? � - � K 100 (R PEA 14 574, ever x 28 x 32 -A3. 2-7 = o, q 4 rt-3 Z �2 3��iame� �Fe ��v,v«leh leng C .8 %e 47 U l .A 7-12 11s 1„ bs o ME_, ?,off b �t to 6� LF� Reduce length y o p 3, 0 Pie 1 .>3/28/02 Page 1 STEPHEN WAITE, LOT B 'L OT C, MARCH 28, 2002 LEVEL POOL TABLE SUMMARY MATCH INFLOW -STO- -DIS- <-PEAK-> STORAGE MAT y <-------- DESCRIPTION --------- >--(cfs)--(cfs)---id---id--<-STAGE> id VOL (cf) r 2 YR 24 HR ................... 0.01 0.05 P1 C1 85.31 11 175.22 01.0 10 YR 24 HR .................. 0.02 0.07 P1 C1 85.94 12 309.06 0-0 100 YR 24 HR .........:....... 0.04 0.11 P1 Cl 87.29 13 508.49 0. 0 4� FOOTAGE BY TYPE TRANS-- 91M: SUPPLY---51 Avnrpqp s■■i m City of Edmonds.. bO 111646 A S IL6ermit No: aiD2 0 0— ,. r RIGHT-OF-WAY CONSTRUCTION PERMIT Issue Date: x A. Address or Vicinity. of Construction: ! i N5 C;� F B. Type of Work•(be specific): --�-� �, ,�" •.L�i � '�• ail �.1.) �i�' .� ��'1 I r' ra• '� s J r C.. Contractor: CContact: • Mailing Address: /1 38 30y T� y1Q �: Phone: U (� ' f`� IdOfa`4t 4� �}2(t:a `' State License #, 1`" + 1•'� 1'�) C� l Y tit 1� :' Liability Insurance: Bond: $ D: Building Permit # (if applicable): " SidESewei Permit # (if applicable): 0 E. ❑ Commercial ❑ Subdivision ❑ City Project ❑ EUC (PUD, VERIZON,,PSE, AT& T, OVWD) ❑ Multi -Family ! ©,.Single..Family; ❑ Other* (" ,..� • I ",� INSPECTOR' F. PAVEMENT CUT: © YES ❑ No G. SIZE OF CUT a� X CONCRETE CUT: ❑ YES ❑ NO . ,S •� 1: � .'•... iaiS.:. ...5-• t-_. tS.n •rt .:..! +.M. '.. .. ...J•• ..�', 1 INDEMNITY. • Applicant understands Eby his/herssig-nature to...'this. .s i application he/she '!ioldi' lie 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 of its departments or employees, including but not limited to the defense of any legal proceedings, including defense costs and attorney fees by reason of granting this permit. ti THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR WORKMANSHIP AND MATERIALS FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR 'FOLLOWING THE FINAL INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE WORK. ESTIMATED RESTORATION FEES WILL BE HELD UNTIL THE FINAL STREET PATCH IS COMPLETED BY CITY FORCES, AT WHICH TIME A DEBIT OR CREDIT WILL BE PROCESSED FOR ISSUANCE TO THE APPLICANT. ♦ Traffic control and public safety shall be in accordance with City regulations as required by the City Engineer. Every flagger must .be trained as requir•ed.wbN (WAC 296-155-305 and must have certification verifying completion of the required training in their possession. ♦ Restoration,is to be in accordance with City codes. All street -cut trench .work shall be patched with asphalt or' City- approved`material prior to the end of the workday — NO EXCEPTIONS. ♦ Three sets of construction drawings of proposed work are required with the permit application. CALL DIAL -A -DIG (1-800-424-5555) PRIOR TO•BEGINNING WORK I HAVE READ THE ABOVE STATEMENTS AND UNDERSTAND THE PERMIT REQUIREMENTS AND ACKNOWLEDGE THAT I MUST MAKE THE PINK COPY OF THE PERMIT AVAILABLE ON SITE AT ALL TIMES FOR INSPECTIONS a Signature C1_ e�:i� Date (Contractor or Agent): 6 FOR CITY' `USk ONLY • : Approved by. t 4,.. m Right-of-way. "'7%}� Time Authorized: Void After / �.Q / OS, Disruption Fee/Fund 111: Special Conditions: i \'K-Tl'f T 1(. let!{l�.dL- estoration Fee: W�L.Lon Total Fee: \AdL sle-f. �`TOT�� OXII( Receipt No: , ! GPA Issued by: - ("A-�.`�^ j,�'!{w} ,S "!�' e 1. `1../A _� ,1 � j i4 v' L" 7 r �//• Nj j,//J UPON COMPLETION OF PERMITTED WORK, AN ENGINEERING FINAL INSPECTION IS REQUIRED PER CHAPTER 18.00 OF THE EDMONDS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT. CODE.(Phone,425-771-0220, Ext.1326) FINAL APPRO, VAL ,OF PERMITTED'WORK _Y09" i'i "Oa-k, t er uw - ZsW ,✓ea ,DAT4. E: •Y spector's Signature �(;blll✓1S,- , t .-t t; For in§pection requirements see Engineering:Inspection°Information.handout i DA My Documents\Forms\Engnmg\ROWpermit_ doc , City of Edmonds . Permit No: 60 '/&9 RIGHT -OF WAY CONSTRUCTION PERMIT IssueDate:.�'/%' oz. A. Address or Vicinity of Construction: B: Type of Work (be specific): UTt,W T�, 10/N(tJ6 , 6tWa?m)6j �irvWz dV C. Contractor:�l�/ -Z �/l% �`i Contact: e! / I / / " � ! 1A w��fJtrdr4tL� . y Mailing Address: 6 'A/A•5 `YS,ta�2Phone: `7 - 44:9tim" :7 0 12- State License #: D/TfCHM7-a© LiabilityInsurance: ( Bond: D. Building Permit # (if applicable): Side Sewer Permit # (if applicable): E. ❑' Commercial Subdivision ❑ City Project ❑ EUC (PUD, VERIZON,�-PS) ; AT& T, OVWD) ❑ Multi -Family ❑ Single Family ❑ -Other INSPECTOR: F. ' PAVEMENT CUT: .0 YES ❑ NO CONCRETE CUT ❑ YES ❑ NO G. SIZE OF CUT X k' INDEMNITY.- Applicant understands, by his/her, signature to this application 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 of its departments .or employees, including but not limited to, the defense of.any legal proceedings including.defense costs and attorney fees byireason of granting this permlit.,,, THE CONTRACTOR IS. RESPONSIBLE FOR WORKMANSHIP AND,. MATERIALS. FOR PERIOD OF, ONE YEAR FOLLOWING THE, FINAL INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE WORK. ESTIMATED RESTORATION FEES WILL BE HELD UNTIL THE FINAL: STREET PATCH IS COMPLETED BY CITY FORCES, AT WHICH TIME A DEBIT OR CREDIT WILL BE PROCESSED FOR ISSUANCE TO THE APPLICANT. . ' ♦ 'Traffic control and public safety shall be in accordance with City regulations as required by the City Engineer. Every dagger rmust be trained as required by (WAC) 296-155-305 and must have certification 'verifying completion of the _. required training in their possession. ♦ Restoration is to be in accordance with City codes.. All street -cut trench work shall be patched with asphalt or City=`' approved material prior to the end of the workday - NO EXCEPTIONS. ♦ Three sets of construction drawings of proposed work are required with the permit application. CALL DIAL -A -DIG (1-800-424-5555)'PRIOR TO -BEGINNING WORK yI HAVE, READ THE ABOVE S1 TEMENTS AND UNDERSTAND THE PERMIT REQUIREMENTS A'ND ACKNOWLEDGE THAT I MUST MAKE TH PINK` OPY OF THE PERMIT AVAILABLE ON SITE AT ALL TIMES FOR'INSPECTIONS' Signaure- =- Date: t'O // . 7 /V 2'" ( nt act�or Agent) T FOR CITY USE ONLY Approved by:.G Time Authorized: Voi& After 4u n ,f- Special Conditions: A d5rh'&L, O re wrrc� ',�"® ,�., `�/!cs:' . �� .. �N4"'+p'!r -•'t_ m r'� r� / 8i/lr7Yt r:?ir>!i'?(�' ��t."�; t.^�'r� �r (.��7 g „T Right-of-way Fee: �%U g5, grLA 416- . Disruption Fee/Fund 111: Restoration Fee: Total Fee•75-. Receipt No • / $ Issued by: ,c..7,t,,1► /air- ' .....�. UPON COMPLETION OF PERMITTED WORK, AN ENGINEERING FINAIL.-I-11 IS REQUIRED PER CHAPTER 18.00 OF THE EDMONDS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE (Phone 425- 71-0220i Ext. 1326) FINAL APPROVAL OF PERMITTED WORK: DATE: nspector's Signature For inspection requirements see Engineering Inspection Information handout. DAMy Documents\Forms\Engnmg\ROWpermit_ doc RK SITALL RECIN PRIO12 TO I)EIZMIT ISSUANCE