1245 VIEWLAND WAY.PDFiiiiiiiiii lill13564
1245 VIEWLAND
WAY
Critical Areas Checklist
`Site Information (soils/topography/hydrology/vegetation)
1. 'Site Address/Location: J �q ;xi lc,,J— LJ c•z r,
2. Property Tax Account Number: 4-Z r111 15 (),T) Cas:aTQ3
3. Approximate Site Size (acres or square feet):
4. Is this site currently developed7 yes; no.
Ifyes; how is site developed?-- HO rK-P-
5. Describe the general site topography- Check all that apply.
Flat: -less than 5-feet elevation change over entire site.
A4�
E � E IV E
1 U L 2 9 1097
Rolling: slopes on site 4 (a vertical rise of 10-feet over a
. generally less than 15 7
.horizontal distance of 66-feet).
Hilly: slopes p
resent. on. site of more than 15 % and less than 307. ( a vertical rise
Of 10-feet over a horizontal distance of 33 to 66-feet).
Steep: -grades of (a vertical rise of 10-feet over a
greater than 30% present on site
horizontal distance of less than 33-fleetly.
'Other (please d . escribe): _ To ]p
6. Site contains areas of year-round standing water: Approx. Depth:
7. Site contains areas of seasonal standing water: A 0 Approx. Depth:
What season(s) of the year?.
S. Site is in the floodway hy fl, . oodplain A 0 of a water course.
9. Site contains a creek or an area where water flows across thegrounds surface? Flows are year -
.round? Flows are seasonal? ttiQ (What time of year? A 0
.10. Site is primarily: forested ;meadow ;shrubs 401/ mixed
urban landscaped (lawn,shrubs etc)
11. Obvious wetland is present on site: III
For City Staff Use Only
1. Site is Zoned? /C�
2. kS mapped soil type(s)? t' (c.VW411
3. Wetland inventory or C.A. map indicates wetland present on site?
4;,,. :-...Critical Areas inventory or C.A. map indicates Critical Area , on site? Yn 5/ �__
5.. 1 Site within designated earth subsidence landslide hazard area? PD
6 Site . designated esignated on the Environmentally Sensitive Areas Map? VIS f 5,10Ae
.DETERMINATION
"''STUDY REQUIRED CONDITIONAL WAIVER
WAIVER
Reviewed by: 7
Planner Date
UvOI/0404
City of Edmonds
Critical. Areas Checklist
The Critical Areas Checklist contained on
this form_ is to be filled out by any person
preparing a Development Permit
Application for the City of Edmonds .prior
to his/her submittal of a development
permit to the City.
The purpose of the Checklist is to enable
City staff to determine whether any
potential Critical Areas are or may be
present on the subject property. The
information needed to complete the
Checklist should be easily available from
observations of the site or data available .at
City Hall (Critical Areas inventories, maps,
or soil surveys).
An applicant, or his/her representative,
must fill out the checklist, sign and date it,
and submit it to the City. The. City will
review the checklist, make a precursory site
visit, and make a determination of the
subsequent steps necessary to complete a
development permit application.
With a signed copy of this form, the
applicant should also submit a vicinity reap
or plot plan for individual lots of the parcel
with enough detail that City staff. can find
and identify the subject parcel(s). In
addition, the applicant shall include
other .pertinent information (e.g. site
plan, topography :map, etc.) or studies in
conjunction with this Checklist to assist
staff in cotnpleting their preliminary
assessment of the site.
I have completed the attached Critical Area Checklist and attest that the answers provided are
factual, to the best of my knowledge (fill out the appropriate column below).
Owner / Applicant:
TI MMy (,4 it t?
Name
12 L1V t,/ 1 e,J VcL'
Street Address
Applicant Representative:
r ()u c15 E �
Name
6q(; /6-A A",'We, -
Street Address
'�r� 1nu�if C,/o�
� D Q ��i� W6 711 i I
�{� � �'� Ito r� �G � -0 ,33
Y)—r 51,2 9531 7/
city, State, ZIP
Phone
City, State, ZIP
Phone
Signature
Date Signature
9
Date
. City of Edmonds
Critical Areas Determination
Applicant: Moose Inc. Determination #: CA-97-146
Project Name: L ,permit Number:
Site Location: 1245 Viewland Way Property Tax Acct #: L7295-000-006-0003
Project Description:
Non -Project Specific
Determination: Study Required:
During review and inspection of the subject site, it was found that the site appears to contain
and/or is adjacent to a Steep Slope Hazard Area pursuant to Chapter 20.15B of the Edmonds
Community Development Code (ECDC). To determine if a Steep Slope Hazard Area does exist,
a topographic survey prepared by a Licensed Land Surveyor delineating Steep Slope Hazard
Areas must be completed. Any slope 40% or more with a vertical elevation change of at least 20
feet of rise will be classified as a Steep Slope Hazard Area. A 50 foot buffer is required from
both the top and toe of the slope. A 15 foot building setback is required from the 50 foot buffer.
For development of any kind which is proposed within the critical area, 50 foot buffer or 15 foot
buffer setback, it must be shown. that the development' will not.adversely impact the Critical Area
or its buffer, by doing one or possibly both of the following depending on the outcome of the
study:
For development proposals which will occur within the 50 foot buffer, but no closer than
10 feet from the top or toe of the slope, -the 50 foot buffer requirement may be reduced to
10 feetif a study is completed by a licensed geologist or geotechnical engineer which
clearly demonstrates that the proposed buffer alteration will have no adverse impact upon
the site, the public or any private party. All Critical Area Studies must be completed
under a three party contract where the City hires the professional required, and the
applicant pays for the study (pursuant to ECDC Section 20.15B.150).
2. If development must occur within the critical area, buffer, and/or buffer setback, and is
not identified as an exception per ECDC Chapter 20.15B, a Reasonable Use Exception
and Variance must be obtained pursuant to ECDC 20.15B.180A and 20.15B.040C.
All proposed development of the subject lot must meet the requirements of Chapter 19.05
(Building Permits - Earth Subsidence and Landslide) of the Edmonds Community Development
Code.
r '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 Areas or its buffers, a conditional .
waiver may be issued on a project by project basis.
Jason Tourtellot September 9 1997
Name Signature Date.
2
CITY OF EDMONDS BARBARAFAHEY
MAYOR
121 STH AVENUE NORTH • EDMONDS. WA 98020 • (425) 771-0220 • FAX (425) 771-0221
COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT
j�c.1890
Public Works • Planning/Building • Parks and Recreation • Engineering • Wastewater Treatment Plant
October 20, 1997
Paul Webber
Meta Engineering
P.O. Box 77806
Seattle, WA 98100
SENT VIA FAX: (206) 546-6436
Dear Mr. Webber:
I have received a faxed copy of your letter stating that, in your opinion, the property
located at 1245 Viewland Way is at risk for slope failure, causing an emergency situation
where immediate action is required to prevent or eliminate the threat to health or safety of
persons or property. Therefore the City hereby grants a waiver from the requirements of
the City of Edmonds Critical Areas Ordinance for construction work and development
required to stabilize the area at risk for slope failure.
Please note that this letter in no way grants relief from any permits or require ments.other
than those found in ECDC section 20.15B. Please, consult with the Building Division for
permit submittal requirements. It is the applicant's responsibility to ensure that all plans
are in conformance with all City requirements. Thus you may wish to consult with the
Planning Division, the Building Division and the Engineering Division for specific
requirements.
If you have any further questions please contact either Jason Tourtellot or, John Bissell at
(425) 771-0220.
Sincerely,
John Bissell, AICP
Senior Planner
c. Jason Tourtellot
• Incorporated August 11, 1890
Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan
PLANNING DATA
NAME: m►il k u e—
Z JG�
SITE ADDRESS: !` DAD v
TE: Z
ZONING: �j J PLAN CHK#:
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:&L±b�/L �W.-C,
CORNER LOT /VU (Yes/No) FLAG LOT A122 (Yes/No)
SETBACKS:
Required Setbacks:
Front: Left Side: Right Side: Rear:
Actual Setbacks:
Front: Left Side: Right Side: Rear:
Street map checked for additional setback required? - (Yes/No)
LEGAL NONCONFORMING LAND USE DETERMINATION ISSUED (Y/N)
LOT COVERAGE:
Maximum Allowed: Actual:
BUILDING HEIGHT:
Maximum Allowed: Actual Height:
Datum Point: Datum Elevation
A.D.U. CREATED?:
SUBDIVISION:
CRITICAL AREAS #: l 1 A --
SEPA DETERMINATION:
LOT AREA:
OTHER:
Plan Review By:
WIN
c AMes\pcttnit\^plandaLdoc
i�"I'fi!le"U16a.�wiwTi�:rrvuv�lll '481(l
CONSTRICTION PEFiMiv APPLICATION
�i5 � •���`��' ,�
JOB
� /(/' Y
ADDRESS ON7 LI-5� �r
NAM°c(CA NAME OF BUSINESS)
MAILING ADDRESS
Zo2-o9 — 1N p GcJ
CHECK
LEGAL DESCRIPTIONISIO
SUBDIVN NO.
LID NO.
PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY PER OFFICIAL STREET MAP.
EXISTING REQUIRED DEDICATION
PROPOSED
CITY
TELEPHONE NUMBER
'
�-
NAME
e58> A��sG7T
RIGHT OF WAY CONSTRUCTION PERMIT REQUIRED ❑
STREET USE PERMIT REQUIRED G
ADDRESS
�5 �� J��•�
SEE ENGINEERING MEMO DATED
CITY
LYAvn/woQo K,)A 99o3
TELEPHONE NUMBER
-74Z —
REMARKS
or✓.,�
S
NAME
p
' v - / �' -"/ / Ca o/ IV of
ADDRESS
`S / / ? r -
METER SIZE
BUILDING SUPPLY SIZE
FIXTURE UNITS
Z
CITY
f ,e9
�V
TELEPHONE NUMBER
REMARKS
S LICENSE NUMBER
SIGN AREA
ALLOWED PROPOSED
ENV. REVIEW
COMPLETE EXEMPT
ADS NO.
_
0
Legal Description of Property: Include all easements
(show below or attach four copies)
SHORELINE
�. //„r J VARIANCE OR CU PLANNING REVIEW gY� DAT
L�SiTi4TE�, YARDS HEIGHT LOT COVE i
/® �i 5
FRONT SIDE REAR
REMARKS
r���
u NEI 1 U RESIDENTIAL PLUMBING
ADDIALTER
COMMERCIAL
MECHANICAL
,
REPAIR RETAINING WALL SIGN
EXCAVATE ❑ FENCE
CHECKED BY
TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION
CODE
HEIGHT
/
M
DOUSH (_ X—FT)
PRE -MOVE REMODEL IN ❑ swim
COMPLIANCE INSP. POOL
SPECIAL IN PECTOn
AREA OCCUPANCY
OCCUPANT
C� WOOD INSERT ElAPT. BLDG
REQUIRED
El YES NO
GROUP
—
LOAD
Z
RENEWAL
REMARKS
7 S.
NUMBER OF STORIES
NUMBER OF
_
DWELLING
m
O,
UNITS
NATURE OF WORK TO BE DONE (ATTACH PLOT PLAN),
P�
O O
VALUATION
FEE
PLAN CHECK FEE
BUILDING
SOO
PLUMBING
'
MECHANICAL
7
This Permit covers work to be done on private property ONLY.
GRADING/FILL
Any construction on the public domain (curbs, sidewalks,
driveways, marquees, etc.) will require separate permission.
STATE SURCHARGE
Permit Application:180 Days
Permit Limit: 1 Year- Provided Work is Started Withsn 180 Days
ENERGY CODE
I
"Applicant, on behalf of his or her spouse, heirs, assigns and
I
Wsuccessors
in interest, agrees to indemnify, defend and hold
j
harmless the City of Edmonds, Washington, Its officials,
cc
employees, and agents from any and all claims for damages of
=
whatever nature, arising directly or indirectly from the Issuance
°
of this permit. Issuance of this permit shall not be deemed to
PL>N CHECK DEPOSIT
g�
modify, waive or reduce any requirement of any city ordinance
i
nor limit in any way the City's ability to enforce any ordinance
provision."
TOTAL AMOUNT DUE
id -yam
5
I hereby acknowledge that I have read this application; that the
Information given is correct; and that I am the owner, or the duly
ATTENTION
APPLICATION APPROVAL
I
authorized agent of the owner. I agree to comply with city and
state laws regulating construction; and In doing the work authoriz-
THIS PERMIT
AUTHOH!ZES
This application is not a permit until
ed thereby, no person will be employed In violation of the Labor
ONLY THE
signed by the Building Official or his
Code of the State of Washington relating to Workmen's Compensa-
WORK NOTED
Deputy; and fees are paid, and receipt Is
ti n Ins nce.
INSPECTION
acknowledged In space provided.
A R IOWNER R A NTI u,• 7ATE SI' NEO
DEPARTMENT
�' % 3��
L
CITY OF
OFFICIAL' AT DATE
a
EDMONDS
0
CITY OF EDMONDS
- �- CONSTRUCTION PERMIT APPLICATION
• NAME (OR NAME OF BUSIN I
= MAILING ADDRESS
A ;�/n , ell - W/ lev. .
PUBLIC RIGHT F WAY PER OFFICIAL STREET MAP.
EXISTING REQUIRED DEDICATION
PROPOSED
RIGHT OF WAY CONSTRUCTION PERMIT REQUIRED
STREET USE PERMIT REQUIRED C
SEE ENGINEERING MEMO DATED
ADDRESS
U/� L F L�% _
1
BUILDING SUPPLY SIZE
/'r
FIXTURE UNITS
Z0
CITY
1 &JSTAATELICENSE
T LEPHONE NUMB
NUMBER
11
IE
[REMARKS
6N• AREA
PROPOSED
ENV. REVIEW
COMPLETE EXEMPT
ADB N(
LgalDescriptionnoffProperty-Includealleasements
howbelow or attach four copies)
SHORELIn
R CU
�7`
PUNNING REVIEW B
r Fi)
FRONT' l�' SLOE' REAK54
HEIGHT
OT COVERAGE
8 G
N NEW
ADDIALTER
REPAIR
DEMOLISH
REMODEL
OO
ICJ RESIDENTIAL
COMMERCIAL
RETAINING WALL
OR FILLVATE
PRE -MOVE INSPJ
MPLIANC INSP.
1__J PLUMBING
MECHANICAL
SIGN
FENCE
❑ 8WIM
ppC`
-
CHECKED BY
o
TYPE OF
SPECIAL IN
REQUIRED
0 YES LINO
.1N-SEROVEI
❑ Al. I.
RENCWAL
MARKS
/tCo6RQSS .TNsoe(
NUMBER OF STORIES
2
NUMBER OF
DwEL NoUNITS
NATURE OF WORK TO BE DONE (ATTACH
PLOT PLAN)
CODE HEIGHT /
/9a'Z zs
OCCUPANCY OCCUPANT
GROUP /)� LOAD
*k 4wex6y Ca9E a
VALUATION
FEE
O
PUN CHECK FEE
BUILDING
d
/_
PLUMBING(/
-
MECHANICAL
This Permit covers work to be done on private property ONLY.
GRADINGIFILL
Any construction on the public domain (curbs, sidewalks,
STATE SURCHARGE
driveways, marquees, etc.) WIII require separate permission.
Permit Application:180 Days
Permit Limit: I Year- Provided Work Is Started Within 180 Days
ENERGY CODE
J
"Applicant, on behalf of his or her spouse, heirs, assigns and
�w��-� r
P"
ruceessors in Interest, Agrees to Indemnify, defend and hold
harmless the City of Edmonds, Washington, Its officials,
i employees, and agents from any and all claims for damages of
Rc.�+ # S yg
whatever nature, arising directly or Indirectly from the Issuance
of this permit. Issuance of this permit shall not be deemed to
PLAN CHECK DEPOSIT
D
modify, waive or reduce any requirement of any city ordinance
/
i nor limit In any way the City's ability to enforce any ordinance
TOTAL AMOUNT DUE
provision."
I hereby acknowledge that 1 have read this application; that the
ATTENTION
APPLICATION APPROVAL
Information given is correct; and that 1 am the owner, or the duly
authorized agent of the owner. I agree to comply with city and
state laws regulating Construction; and in doing the work authoriz.
THIS PERMIT
AUTHORIZES
This application Is not a permit until
ad thereby, no Derson will be employed In violation of the Labor
ONLY THE
signed by the Building Official or his
Code of the State of Washington relating to Workmen's Compensa-
WORK NOTED
Deputy; and fees are paid, and receipt is
tl n Insukance.
INSPECTION
acknowledged in apace provided.
SIGNATUP (OWNER O AGENT) ATE SIG D
1OFFICIAL
DEPARTMENT
TY
'�111E DATE
DIMO�S.
IO/�i8b
ATTENTION
771.3202
SED BY: DATE
zZ�86
IT IS UNLAWFUL TO USE OR OCCUPY A BUILDING OR STRUCTURE
UNTIL A FINAL INSPECTION HAS BEEN MADE AND APPROVAL OR
ORIGINAL — File YELLOW — Inspector
A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY HAS BEEN GRANTED. UBC
CHAPTER 3.
PINK — Owner GOLD — Assessor
10Z•T8
I I.
IWIWWAN
F L
�A
BORYIEW—E3
FOR: MR. A MRS MIKE
—F�ol
-
ss
s1 .may -� - - � Y m _ 1 ` '� P 'it � v ✓` 4 �.�
�i S.p i r "4� � e^.� $ - - � _ .._+ �, s ` v � *' Y t t`�+:' � � x°• e I"'�J
'+. A-c`.�il".ava°IL:..ir!.LSZi.�-'�AZ` u�1' r1`�si: '-u � .... •�.,, �• � .d '� ,4.. Jz �� �
COMMUNITY SERVICES
ENGINEERING/BUILDING
MEMO TO: Building Division
FROM: Engineering Division
SUBJECT ADDRESS: 124 5 —YCN�IiSWp �/9y ���oD�Zy
I,f7f�PERMIT APPROVED FOR FINAL
PERMIT NOT APPROVED FOR FINAL
Requirements: j
ij
1.
2.
3.
4.
a.) i\S \ . i • .•.
kA
•\ ) \ , \ >_ �` . cN \
sl
' � L �i r�t. 2+Ca`\ )•'\'��1'� i �. � \3V _) , 7�:�•7'+ti,r1\� �\ \� e\ \\ ��• y�'t '"''�i\� t� ..._',:� ���` � j �r
FINAL APPROVAL. GIVEN BY:;:
tit _ t \« _..,.. ;� ,b.) , . i • •t. .: r,'
�. > ...'.> T.) � i • �i. ..\ i .\ 'S � , - � Intl&1$ .: DSiC
Building
Fire Dept a
Planning (ADB)
r
- - Engineering ' � �'�: ���;•�:.. ';
ram, I'
t ♦ .'i`..\ . - ... _ . ..>.1 •. . �:- ..1 �: \ � _. 'p \. •t•`�'{• :t _`i. -.i1 �?l'. L �1; l �.Sy (�lyr<!��1.
` r•r.i :W.
RECORD OF INSPECTIONS
Date Passed
` FOUNDATION
}louse �
it. Porches, piers
1A 'Ple:Retaining Walls '-
—S Garage, carport • _ '
' PLUMBING
i `. �..j3•X7 Underground
,i Rough -in 77
1i
Water service u`TC
cs �
HEATING SYSTEM
FRAMING
WALLBOARD
FINAL
�� rM
' r
n
ki•=�s� yew',.>• "4+�'�
8.9 199
O
City of Edmonds
Critical Areas Checklist.
The Critical Areas Checklist contained on
this form is to be filled out by any person
preparing a Development Permit
Application for the City of Edmonds prior
to his/her submittal of a development
permit to the City.
The purpose of the Checklist is to enable
City staff to determine whether any
potential Critical Areas are or may be
present on the subject property. The
information needed to complete the
Checklist should be easily available from
observations of the site or data available at
City Hall (Critical Areas inventories, maps,
or soil surveys).
An applicant, or his/her representative,
must fill out the checklist, sign and date .it,
and submit it to the City. The City will
review the checklist, make a precursory site
visit, and make a determination of the
.subsequent steps necessary to complete a
development permit application.
With a signed copy of this form, the
.applicant should also submit a vicinity map
or plot plan for individual lots of the parcel
with enough detail that City staff can find
and -identify the subject parcei(s). in
addition, the applicant shall include
other pertinent information (e.g. site
plan, topography map, etc.) or studies in
conjunction with this Checklist to assist
staff in completing their preliminary
assessment of the site.
I have completed the attached Critical Area Checklist and attest that the answers provided are
factual, to the best of my knowledge (fill out the appropriate column below).
Owner ! Applicant:
Name
j ., q .� Ui 2
Street Address
Applicant Representative:
Name
Cyr /GA Ad.- Llw'
Street Address
, -d
if %l'a..
� �o%,210 :w6 77%l7l6
�/`; � �� tUvr) t^lW �%1;js�
y2 J�.,�i 3 � 7/
Ctty, State, ZIP
Phone
City, State, ZIP
Phone
Signature
at Signature Date
L;rttical Areas Checklist
Site Information (soils/topography/hydrology/vegetation) '
T
1. Site Address/Location: U1/1`�,;; (rJL (',1'c / r c�yyL;;�;�.�
2. Property Tax Account Number: ✓ �� �� J IV -
3. Approximate Site Size (acres or square feet):
4. Is this site currently developed? '/ i' ` 1 9
yes; no. �,. ,.� � � t#. _.
If yes; how .is site developed H (K2-
5. Describe the general site topography- Check all that apply.
FIat: 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 33t-fleet).
Other (please describe):_ I o P z,�1 rt i t
6. Site contains areas of year-round standing water: !A 0 ; Approx. Depth:
7. Site contains areas of seasonal standing water: Approz. Depth:
What season(s) of the year?,
8. Site is in the floodway y floodplain 110 of a water course.
9. Site contains a creek or an area where water flows across .the.grounds surface? Flows are year-
round? r1 L) Flows are seasonal? f10 (What time of year? /I r . ).
10. Site is primarily: forested ; meadow ; shrubs ; mixed
urban landscaped (lawn,shrubs etc)
11. Obvious wetland is present on site: h.o .
/ For City Sta:t'iUse Only
--
1. Site is Zoned? /< 4 - / L
2. .SCS mapped soil type(.,)? pjlQLw41 q� - Okll I�
3. Wetland inventory or C.A. map indicates wetland present on site? A/0
4 ' :-,.Critical Areas inventory or C.A. map indicates Critical Area on site? Y. 5 /v.La, - f� e>
5.. Site within designated earth subsidence landslide hazard area? AID
6. Site designated on the Environmentally Sensitive Areas Map? UIf i S is e�✓v .- ,�°p
.DETERMINATION
F -"STUDY REQUIRED
WAIVER --�-
Reviewed by:
Planner
P--V 01ro4s4
CONDITIONAL WAIVER
Date
j J
t
City of Edmonds
Critical Areas Determination
Applicant: Moose Inc. Determination #: CA-97-146
Project Name: Permit Number:
Site Location: 1245 Viewland Way Property Tax Acct #: 7295-000-006-0003
Project Description:
Non -Project Specific
Determination: Study Required:
During review and inspection of the subject site, it was found that the site appears to contain
and/or is adjacent to a Steep Slope Hazard Area pursuant to Chapter 20.15B of the Edmonds
Community Development Code (ECDC). To determine if a Steep Slope Hazard Area does exist,
a topographic survey prepared by a Licensed Land Surveyor delineating Steep Slope Hazard
Areas must be completed. Any slope 40% or more with a vertical elevation change of at least 20
feet of rise will be classified as a Steep Slope Hazard Area. A 50 foot buffer is required from
both the top and toe of the slope. A 15 foot building setback is required from the 50 foot buffer.
For development of any kind which is proposed within the critical area, 50 foot buffer or 15 foot
buffer setback, it must be shown that the development will not adversely impact the Critical Area
or its buffer, by doing one or possibly both of the following depending on the outcome of the
study:
1. For development proposals which will occur within the 50 foot buffer, but no closer than
10 feet from the top or toe of the slope, the 50 foot buffer requirement may be reduced to
10 feet if a study is completed by ,a licensed geologist or geotechnical engineer which
clearly demonstrates that the proposed buffer alteration will have no adverse impact upon
the site, the public or any private party. All Critical Area Studies must be completed
under a three party contract where the City hires the professional required, and the
applicant pays for the study (pursuant to ECDC Section 20.15B.150).
2. If development_ must occur within the critical area, buffer, and/or buffer setback, and is
not identified as an exception per ECDC Chapter 20.15B, a Reasonable Use Exception
and Variance must be obtained pursuant to ECDC 20.15B.180A and 20.15B.040C.
All proposed development of the subject lot must meet the requirements of Chapter 19.05
(Building Permits - Earth Subsidence and Landslide) of the Edmonds Community Development
Code.
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 Areas or its buffers, a conditional
waiver may be issued on a project by project basis.
Name
Signature
Date
I
CITY OF EDMONDs BARBARAFAHEY
121 5TH AVENUE NORTH EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (425) 771-0220 FAX (425) 771-0221 MAYOR
COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Public Works • Planning/Building • Parks and Recreation • Engineering • Wastewater Treatment Plant
October 20, 1997
Paul Webber
Meta Engineering
P.O. Box 77806
Seattle, WA 98100
SENT VIA FAX: (206) 546-6436
Dear Mr. Webber:
I have received a faxed copy of your letter stating that, in your opinion, the property
located at 1245 Viewland Way is at risk for slope failure, causing an emergency situation
where immediate action is required to prevent or eliminate the threat to health or safety of
persons or property. Therefore the City hereby grants a waiver from the requirements of
the City of Edmonds Critical Areas Ordinance for construction work and development
required to stabilize the area at risk for slope failure.
Please note that this letter in no way grants relief from any permits or requirements other
than those found in ECDC section 20.15B. Please, consult with the Building Division for
permit submittal requirements. It is the applicant's responsibility to ensure that all plans
are in conformance with all City requirements. Thus you may wish to consult with the
Planning Division, the Building Division and the Engineering Division for specific
requirements.
If you have any further questions please contact either Jason Tourtellot or, John Bissell at
(425) 771-0220.
Sincerely,
John Bissell, AICP
Senior Planner
c. Jason Tourtellot
0 Incorporated August I1, 1890
Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan
GILES'
1 ENGINEERING t ISSOCIATES, INC.
GEOTECHNICAL, ENVIRONMENTAL & CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS CONSULTANTS
• Dallas, TX
• Los Angeles, CA
• Madison, WI
• Milwaukee, WI
• Seattle, WA
• Washington, D.C.
April 10, 1997
Pacific Engineering Technologies, Inc.
1300 Dexter Avenue North, Suite 101
Seattle, WA 98109
Attention: Mr. Art Schroeder
Subject: Final Summary of Construction Monitoring Services
Beresford Slide Repair
City of Edmonds Permit No. 970048
1215 Viewland Drive, Edmonds, Washington
Project No. 6M-9612001
Dear Mr. Schroeder:
This letter summarizes the results of our construction monitoring services performed for the
above -referenced project. These services consisted of 8 site visits between January 20 and 27, 1997
performed for the purpose of providing part-time construction monitoring services during
construction of the Beresford slide repair. The observations have been summarized in Daily Field
Reports No. 1 through No. 8 previously submitted to you, copies of which are attached. This letter
is an instrument of service and the conclusions presented herein have been formulated in accordance
with generally accepted professional engineering practice in the field of geotechnical engineering.
No other warranty is either expressed or implied.
Based on our field observations made during the 8 site visits, it appears the work was
completed in general accordance with the project plans and the geotechnical engineering design
recommendations. The excavations were generally observed to extend to required depths with an
adequate number of benches cut into dense native soils below the recent slide plane identified in the
geotechnical report. Replacement quarry spalls were generally placed to a greater thickness on the
hillside than was originally estimated to be required. However, the increased thickness was deemed
necessary to allow equipment access to the top of the slide. The sliding soil block identified in the
plans at the top of the slide area moved downslope significantly (approximately 8 feet) during the
permitting process prior to commencement of repair work and resulted in further loss of soil and
rockeries in the Beresford yard. Rockeries were replaced with rock -filled gabions which were
adequately keyed into dense native layers below the recent slide plane. The repaired area was
covered with a thin lift of soil and hydroseeded to mitigate aesthetic concerns. Visqueen was placed
to protect the slope from erosion until vegetation can become firmly established. Visqueen should
19019 36th Avenue West • Suite G • Lynnwood, WA 98036
206l771-5775 • Fax 206/771-5557 • E-Mail seattle@gilesengr.com
Beresford Slide Repair
Project No. 6M-9612001
April 10, 1997
Page 2
GILES
ENGINEERING l 1SSOCIATES, INC.
be removed in the spring months once the hydroseed has germinated and rooted and the threat of
serious precipitation has passed. Landscaping at the top of the repair area in the Beresford yard has
yet to be completed. We recommend drains be installed and maintained by the upslope property
owner to collect water off the walks and patio and divert it away from the slope. Additionally, the
sprinkler system on the Beresford backyard should be capped and abandoned within 20 feet of the
top of slope.
Based upon our observations of the site work, the geotechnically-related work that we
observed was performed in general accordance with the approved plans. The area affected by the
October 1996 slide, as noted on Figure 1 of the November 26, 1996 geotechnical report by Giles,
has been constructed to a calculated factor -of -safety of greater than 1.5. In our opinion, the risk of
slope instability within the area defined by the "clearing limits" for the subject slide repair (as noted
on Figure 1 of Giles' November 26, 1996 report) is minimal, provided that upslope property
drainage is maintained. If you have any questions or require additional information, please do not
hesitate to call.
z
EXPIRES i 124 / < I
Enclosures: Daily Field Reports, 1-8
Respectfully submitted,
GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC.
i�
Monte M. Reinders
Staff Engineer
John E. Zipper, P.E.
Regional Manager
GILESENGINEERINGAsSOCIATES, INC.
-GEOTECHNICAL, ENVIRONMENTAL- AND CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS CONSULTANTS-
0 N8 W22350 JOHNSON ROAD, SUITE Al / WAUKESHA, WI 53186 / (414) 544-0118 / FAX: (414) 549-5868
❑ 4801 VOGES ROAD / MADISON, WI 53704 / (608) 838-9708 / FAX: (608) 838-3194
❑ 4875 EAST LA PALMA AVENUE, SUITE 607 / ANAHEIM, CA 92807 / (714) 799-0052 / FAX: (714)799-0068
❑ 12240 INDIAN CREEK COURT, SUITE 105 / BELTSVILLE, MD 20705 / (301) 210-1212 / FAX: (301) 210-1215
❑ 10031 MONROE DRIVE, SUITE 101 / DALLAS, TX 75229 / (214) 358-5885 / FAX: (214) 358-5884
■ 19019 36TH AVENUE WEST, SUITE G / LYNNWOOD, WA 98036 / (206) 771-5775 / FAX: (206) 771-5557
DAILY FIELD MONITORING REPORT
CLIENT: Pacific Engineering Technologies PROJECT: Beresford Slide Repair
1300 Dexter Ave N. Suite 100
Seattle, WA 98109
DATE: January 20, 1997 PROJECT NO.: 6M-9612001.1
WEATHER: Overcast rain 45 degrees FIELD REP.: Kurt Merriman
COMMENTS/RECOMMENDATIONS
Arrived site at 10:00 AM, purpose of visit to review Brad Mason Trucking excavating key trench at slope toe,
look at upper slide area and review activity behind house to east (Hall residence). Upon arrival met with Don of Brad
Mason. Observed key trench excavation beginning on west end of slide area. Trench Was at least 8' wide and 4'.
deep below previous grade, and was being filled with quarry rock. Excavation was causing surficial slide debris on
slope above to fall into excavation. Recommended that removal of this loose material continue and that spalls be
pushed up to butress.upslope side at excavation. Observed that western 15' of key COMPLETED, with another 15'
open and being filled.
Reviewed upper slide area. Block at soil downslope of Beresford patio appears to be creeping downslope.
Setup rough monitoring black mark to measure creep rate. Observed north slope behind Hall residence (to east).
Movement of surficial soil/sod was observed evidenced by tension cracks downslope of retaining wall/deck. Two
perforated pipe discharge onto slope in this area. Mr. David Hall gave permission to tight line their pipe and visqueen
slope area behind his house. See attached for sketch
EWING ENGINEER: John Zipper
6M-9612001.1
GILEsENGINEERINGAsS'OCIATES, INC.
-GEOTECHNICAL, ENVIRONMENTAL AND CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS CONSULTANTS-
❑ N8 W22350 JOHNSON ROAD, SUITE Al / WAUKESHA, WI 53186 / (414) 544-0118 / FAX: (414) 549-5868
❑ 4801 VOGES ROAD / MADISON, WI 53704 / (608) 838-9708 / FAX: (608) 838-3194
❑ 4875 EAST LA PALMA AVENUE, SUITE 607 / ANAHEIM, CA 92807 / (714) 799-0052 / FAX: (714)799-0068
❑ 12240 INDIAN CREEK COURT, SUITE 105 / BELTSVILLE, MD 20705 / (301) 210-1212 / FAX: (301) 210-1215
❑ 10031 MONROE DRIVE, SUITE 101 / DALLAS, TX 75229 / (214) 358-5885 / FAX: (214) 358-5884
■ 19019 36TH AVENUE WEST, SUITE G / LYNNWOOD, WA 98036 / (206) 771-5775 / FAX: (206) 771-5557
DAILY FIELD MONITORING REPORT
CLIENT: Pacific Engineering Technologies
1300 Dexter Ave N. Suite 100
Seattle, WA 98109
DATE: January 20, 1997
WEATHER: Overcast rain 45 degrees .
COMMENTS/RECOMMENDATIONS
PROJECT: Beresford Slide Repair
PROJECT NO.: 6M-9612001.2
FIELD REP.: Kurt Merriman
Returned to site at 2:30 PM. Brad Mason Trucking had almost completed key trench since last site visit.
Trench had beer! excavated full width of area being repaired (40' - 50') at toe of slope. Key trench was 10' in width
and extended up slope some 5 radical feet to buttress cut slope . Hoe operator estimated that key trench would be
completed today. Brad Mason had delivered two rolls of visqueen, sand bags, stakes and rope for slope.area in front
of Hall residence. Recommender that visqueen extend from the Hall retaining wall downslope to edge of treed
(estimated to be 40' + ). The visqueen should be extended from Beresford/Hall property line east to + 5' past second
corrugated white drain line (some 40+ feet). Both white drain lines should be extended downslope to a suitable
discharge away from slope face. Contractor thought visqueen placement would occur today. Left site at 3:00 PM
EWING ENGINEER: John Zipper
6M-9612001.3
GILEsENGINEERINGAssOCIAT - ES, INC.
-GEOTECHNICAL, ENVIRONMENTAL' AND CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS CONSULTANTS-
0 N8 W22350 JOHNSON ROAD, SUITE AI / WAUKESHA, WI 53186 / (414) W-0118 / FAX: (414) 549-5868
❑ 4801 VOGES ROAD / MADISON, WI 53704 / (608) 838-9708 / FAX: (608) 838-3194
O 4875 EAST LA PALMA AVENUE, SUITE 607 / ANAHEIM, CA 92807 / (714) 799-0052 / FAX: (714)799-0068
❑ 12240 INDIAN CREEK COURT, SUITE 105 / BELTS VILLE, MD 20705 / (301) 210-1212 / FAX: (301) 210-1215
❑ 10031 MONROE DRIVE, SUITE 101 / DALLAS, TX 75229 / (214) 358-5885 / FAX: (214) 358-5884
■ 19019 36TH AVENUE WEST, SUITE G / LYNNWOOD, WA 98036 / (206) 771-5775 / FAX: (206) 771-5557
DAILY FIELD MONITORING REPORT
CLIENT: Pacific Engineering Technologies PROJECT: Beresford Slide Repair
1300 Dexter Ave N. Suite 100
Seattle, WA 98109
DATE: January 21, 1997
WEATHER: Overcast
COMMENTS/RECOMMENDATIONS
PROJECT NO.: 6M-9612001.3
FIELD REP.: Monte Reinders
Arrived on site at 12:30 PM to take hand level/rod measurements of upper slope and monitor progress of Brad
Mason' Trucking work on slide repair. Visqueen had been placed over crack in soil across Hall property (see figure
in DFMR #2). Quarry spalls (6'-8') had been placed from toe of slope to approximately halfway to Beresford deck.
The large trackhoe was being.used to relay spalls from stockpiles at base of slope to a smaller hoe working midway
up the slope on a bench. Bench appeared of be 8'-9' wide approximately, 'h of which was of the new spalls and
Yz of which was cut into dense native sands. The bench cut into the dense native sands was estimated to be 5'
horizontal by 5' in height. Hoe operator reported that this was perhaps the third bench cut between the toe of slope
and current location midway up slope. Based on observable andreported conditions, it would appear the spalls are
being adequately keyed into the dense native slope soils: Amount of spalls delivered to and used at site to date
suggest quantities may exceed estimates. Estimates were based on and average .3' thickness placed over slope.
However it appears thickness used to date may average 4 or more feet primarily due to increased number of benches
required to work the small hoe up the slope ahead of the advancing quarry spall fill. Quarry spall quantities should
be expected to increase toe to the increased dimensions of the toe keyway trench (DFMR .#1) and increased over
requiring repair at top of slope. Recommended that spall thickness on the slope be reduced where possible to
minimize final quantity required for repair..
EWING ENGINEER: John Zipper
6M-9612001.3
GILEs,ENGINEERINGAsSOCIATES, INC.
-GEOTECHNICAL, ENVIRONMENTAL AND CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS CONSULTANTS-
0 N8 W22350 JOHNSON ROAD, SUITE AL / WAUKESHA, WI 53186 / (414) 544-0118 / FAX: (414) 549-5868
❑ 4801 VOGES ROAD / MADISON, WI 53704 / (608) 838-9708 / FAX: (608) 838-3194
❑ 4875 EAST LA PALMA AVENUE, SUITE 607 / ANAHEIM, CA 92807 / (714) 799-0052 / FAX: (714)799-0068
❑ 12240 INDIAN CREEK COURT, SUITE 105 / BELTSVILLE, MD 20705 / (301) 210-1212 / FAX: (301) 210-1215
❑ 10031 MONROE DRIVE, SUITE 101 / DALLAS, TX 75229 / (214) 358-5885 / FAX: (214) 358-5884
■ 19019 36TH AVENUE WEST, SUITE G / LYNNWOOD, WA 98036 / (206) 771-5775 / FAX: (206) 771-5557
DAILY FIELD MONITORING REPORT
CLIENT: Pacific Engineering Technologies
1300 Dexter Ave N. Suite 100
Seattle, WA 98109
DATE: January 22 1997
WEATHER: Overcast
COMMENTS/RECOMMENDATIONS
PROJECT: Beresford Slide Repair
PROJECT NO.: 6M-9612001.4
FIELD REP.: Monte Reinders
. Arrived. on site at 11:00 AM to observe ongoing slide repair work. Spalls on slope were placed to within 1.5'
(vertical) from bottom of Beresford deck. Small trackhoe. was working from atop this bench of spalls on the west
side of the slide pulling down the sliding block of soil (identified on the plans) . neat the top of slide -between the
Beresford deck and property line. Soil was pulled down on to the existing spall bench below into a. pile
(approximately 8' high) which the hoe worked its way into in order obtain access to top of slide below the
undermined Beresford patio.. Slide block material was removed to property line to expose dense Esperance sands and
over lying dense gravely sand. Water was observed seeping from the dense sand layers in the exposed bank. Large
trackhoe at base of slope had created a stockpile of spalls between 10; and 15; high and was working from atop this
pile in order to reach high enough on the slope to feed material to the smaller hoe .above. Based on topographic
information obtained yesterday, it had earlier been decided that gabions, founded on a bench cut into the dense
native sand, would be necessary to repair .slope below Beresford patio due to slope steepness in this area and
unfeasibility of repairing rockeries which had previously existed in this area. Gabion recommendations are
summarized in a memo prepared today by Giles Engineering (sent to Art Schroder at Pacific Engineering
REVIEWING ENGINEER: John Zipper
6M-9612001.4
GILEsENGINEERINGAssOCIATES, INC.
-GEOTECHNICAL, ENVIRONMENTAL AND CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS CONSULTANTS-
0 N8 W22350 JOHNSON ROAD, SUITE Al / WAUKESHA, WI 53186 / (414) 544-0118 / FAX: (414) 549-5868
❑ 4801 VOGES ROAD / MADISON, WI 53704 / (608) 838-9708 / FAX: (608) 838-3194
❑ 4875 EAST LA PALMA AVENUE, SUITE 607 / ANAHEIM, CA 92807 / (714) 799-0052 / FAX: (714)799-0068
❑ 12240 INDIAN CREEK COURT, SUITE 105 / BELTSVILLE, MD 20705 / (301) 210-1212 / FAX: (301) 210-1215
❑ 10031 MONROE DRIVE, SUITE 101 / DALLAS, TX 75229 / (214) 358-5885 / FAX: (214) 358-5884
■ 19019 36TH AVENUE WEST, SUITE G / LYNNWOOD, WA 98036 / (206) 771-5775 / FAX: (206) 771-5557
DAILY FIELD MONITORING REPORT
CLIENT: Pacific Engineering. Technologies PROJECT: Beresford Slide Repair
1300 Dexter Ave N. Suite 100
Seattle, WA 98109
DATE: January 23, 1997
WEATHER: Overcast Light Rain
COMMENTS/RECOMMENDATIONS
PROJECT NO.: 6M-9612001.5
FIELD REP.: Monte Reinders
Arrived on site at approximately 2:00 PM to observe ongoing slide repair work. Contractor had placed three
gabions (3'X3' X6') on bottom row and two more on second row. Gabions appeared to be adequately benched into
native dense sand and / or were supported on spalls benched into the slope immediately below. Bottom row o
gabions extended to within approximately 7' of the Beresford / Hall property line. It appeared that an area extending
approximately 10' eastof the property line had slumped down towards the Beresford slide (estimated to have
occurred several weeks previously). Contractor indicated gabions could be extended further east on to Hall property.
However, due to anticipated depth of cut required to reach, bearing material and steepness of slope below Hall
foundation. It was recommended that excavation not extend beyond property line. Area between end of last gabion
and property line was filled with quarry spall backfill.
Equipment: Two trackhoes, two operators, two laborers and one foreman
REVIEWING ENGINEER: John Zipper
6M-9612001.5
GIL.EsENGINEERINGAssOCIATES, INC.
-GEOTECHNICAL, ENVIRONMENTAL' AND CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS CONSULTANTS-
0 N8 W22350 JOHNSON ROAD, SUITE Al / WAUKESHA, WI 53186 / (414) 544-0118 / FAX: (414) 549-5868
❑ 4801 VOGES ROAD / MADISON, WI 53704 / (608) 838-9708 / FAX: (608) 838-3194
❑ 4875 EAST LA PALMA AVENUE, SUITE 607 / ANAHEIM, CA 92807 / (714) 799-0052 /'FAX: (714)799-0068
❑ 12240 INDIAN CREEK COURT, SUITE 105 / BELTSVILLE, MD 20705 / (301) 210-1212 / FAX: (301) 2I0-1215
❑ 10031 MONROE DRIVE, SUITE 101 / DALLAS, TX 75229 / (214) 358-5885 / FAX: (214) 358-5884
■ 19019 36TH AVENUE WEST, SUITE G / LYNNWOOD, WA 98036 / (206) 771-5775 / FAX: (206) 771-5557
DAILY FIELD MONITORING REPORT
CLIENT: Pacific Engineering Technologies PROJECT: - Beresford Slide Repair
1300 Dexter Ave N. Suite 100
Seattle, WA 98109
DATE: I January 24, 1997
WEATHER: Overcast Light Rain
COMMENTS/RECOMMENDATIONS
PROJECT NO.: 6M-9612001.6
FIELD REP.: Monte Reinders
Arrived on site at approximately 9:30 AM to perform hand auger soil exploration at Hall residence foundation
and to observe ongoing slide repair work.
Hand auger exploration results are discussed in memo to follow. Slide repair results, contractor had finished
placement of second and third row of Gabions. Second row extended to Beresford deck. Third row contained three
Gabions. Total Gabion count appeared to be twelve. Contractor placed smalls and topsoil. below Beresford patio and
top of third'Gabion row forming a slope of approximately 2H:1V. Spalls and soil were subsequently placed in front
of lower two gabion rows as hoe worked its way down slope. Contractor finished spall placement below Beresford
deck. Soil bench created mid -slope on 1-22-97 on east side of slope (see 2-33-97 field report) was removed and
replaced with spalls. Soil was placed on top of rock.
Equipment and manpower: two hoes, two operators, two laborers
Rockery drain -from Hall Beresford property line, gabion drain, and a drain installed at edge of Beresford patio
were all routed into the drain pipe below the Beresford deck.
REVIEWING ENGINEER: John Zipper
6M-9612001.8
GILEsENGINEERINGAssOCIATES, INC.
-GEOTECHNICAL, ENVIRONMENTAL' AND CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS CONSULTANTS-
0 N8 W22350 JOHNSON ROAD, SUITE Al / WAUKESHA, WI 53186 / (414) 544-0118 / FAX: (414) 549-5868
❑ 4801 VOGES ROAD / MADISON, WI 53704 / (608) 838-9708 / FAX: (608) 838-3194
❑ 4875 EAST LA PALMA AVENUE, SUITE 607 / ANAHEIM, CA 92807 / (714) 799-0052 / FAX: (714)799-0068
❑ 12240 INDIAN CREEK COURT, SUITE 105 / BELTSVILLE, MD20705 / (301) 210-1212 / FAX: (301) 210-1215
❑ 10031 MONROE DRIVE, SUITE 101 / DALLAS, TX 75229 / (214) 358-5885 / FAX: (214) 358-5884
■ 19019 36TH AVENUE WEST, SUITE G / LYNNWOOD, WA 98036 / (206) 771-5775 / FAX: (206) 771-5557
DAILY FIELD MONITORING REPORT
CLIENT: Pacific Engineering Technologies PROJECT: Beresford Slide Repair
1300 Dexter Ave N. Suite 100
Seattle, WA'98109
DATE: January 27, 1997
WEATHER: Overcast Light Rain
COMMENTS/RECOMMENDATIONS
PROJECT NO.: 6M-9612001.7
FIELD REP.: Monte Reinders
Arrived on site to monitor ongoing slide repair work. Observed that large trackhoe had been moved off site.
Large stockpile at base of slope on which trackhoe had been situated, had apparently been hauled off site. Soil had
been placed over the spalls on the slope. Spoke with operator on small cat hoe who was cleaning up area on back
side of Kirsthy house currently under construction. Operator indicated average soil depth on spalls was 6"-12" and
-that approximately 30 yards of soil were hauled in Saturday to complete top fill on slope. We were informed that
rockery construction at base of slope would begin today and that Kirsthy had directed contractor to extend rockery
behind the two adjacent house on either side of the slide repair. Contractor was in the process of placing visqueen
over slide repair
REVIEWING ENGINEER: John Zipper
6M-9612001.8
GILEsENGINEERIN"G ASSOCIATES, INC.
-GEOTECHNICAL,-ENVIRONMENTAL AND CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS CONSULTANTS-
0 N8 W22350 JOHNSON ROAD, SUITE Al / WAUKESHA, WI 53186 / (414) 544-0118 / FAX: (414) 549-5868
❑ 4801 VOGES ROAD / MADISON, WI 53704 / (608) 838-9708 / FAX: (608) 838-3194
❑ 4875 EAST LA PALMA AVENUE, SUITE 607 / ANAHEIM, CA 92807 / (714) 799-0052 / FAX: (714)799-0068
❑ 12240 INDIAN CREEK COURT, SUITE 105 / BELTSVILLE, MD 20705 / (301) 210-1212 / FAX: (301) 210-1215
❑ 10031 MONROE.DRIVE, SUITE 101 / DALLAS, TX 75229 / (214) 358-5885 / FAX (214) 358-5884
■ 19019 36TH-AVENUE WEST, SUITE G / LYNNWOOD, WA 98036 / (206) 771-5775 / FAX: (206) 771-5557
DAILY FIELD MONITORING REPORT
CLIENT: Pacific Engineering Technologies PROJECT: Beresford Slide Repair
1300 Dexter Ave N. Suite 100
Seattle, WA 98109
DATE: January 27, 1997 PROJECT NO.: 6M-9612001.8
WEATHER: Overcast Light Rain FIELD REP.: Monte Reinders
COMMENTS/RECOMMENDATIONS
Arrived on site at 8:00am to observe slide repair activity. • Upon our arrival, notedcontractor loading out steel
plates used to protect driveway from truck traffic. using the small trackhoe. Rockery Was complete as shown on
plans at base of slope with gravel drain in front per. plan. Rockery, however, extended beyond length shown on plans
behind both houses on either side of slide repair. Rockery in these expanded areas averaged 1'/2 to 2 feet in height.
Planting behind rockery was complete. Visqueen was on slope, although one sheet had been blown off to the side
by wind. Will contact by phone concerning this matter.
REVIEWING,ENGINEER:John Zipper
6M-9612001.8
Memorandum
Giles Engineering Associates, Inc.
19019 36`" Ave. W., Suite G
Lynnwood, Washington 98036
(206)771-5775, FAX(206)771-5557
To: City of Edmonds, Building Department
Atten: Ann Bulliss
From: John Zipper
Subject: Beresford Slide Repair
1215 Viewland Way
Date: December 26, 1996
In response to plan check comment of 12/20/96: "What steps will be taken to ensure the structural
integrity of the deck at 1215 Viewland Way?", please review the following.
The deck is supported on drilled pile foundations, extending to a depth of 13 and 14 feet below
ground surface, 14-inches in diameter. The geotechnical inspection reports from the pile
installation during 1991 indicate that the pile tips are a minimum of 10 feet into dense native sand.
To protect the deck, the contractor will not be allowed to operate equipment or stockpile materials
on the deck structure. Excavations on the slope, downslope of the deck, will be limited as noted
on the Profile drawing attached with the geotechnical report dated November 26, 1996.
���� COPY
Oct-2tJ-97 11:52A meta engineering
` 206 546-6436
Moose Inc
646 16th Ave West
Kirkland, WA 98033
RE: Emergency Permit
Dear Moose:
P o u I R. Weber, P, E
October 19, 1997
I
p i i n C i p a 1
'Try: jop m0i
6 �ss�cG
As stated in my Geotechnical Report, this property is at risk for a slope failure in the area where
we have designed a slope retaining structure. It is important that this retaining structure be started
as soon as possible. With the onset of an unusually wet Fall, the slope could fail at any time. The
house is quite close to the slope, and some damage could easily occur.
It is my opinion that this property presents an emergency situation where immediate action is
required to prevent or eliminate the threat to health or safety of persons or property, therefore an
exemption exemption under 20,15B.040 is needed.
Sincerely,
Paul R Weber, P.E.
rV� R. W B�l
(GN
VIPIMs
•� 1
�. 41
lUNAt.Ct'�' ,
GEOTECHNICAL & ENVIRONMENTAL
SCIENCE & ENGINEERING
PO -BOX 77806 5eattfe,Woahinglon 98171 TEL(206)542-8467 FAX(206)546.6436
MICROFILM
OCT 2 8 1997
Geotechnical Report No.
Site Investigation
Proposed Deck Addition
1245 Viewland Way
Edmonds, Washington
May 27, 1997
97637-01
and Retaining Wall
This report presents the results of site explorations and geotechnical engineering
analyses completed to provide recommendations for the construction of a deck
addition and slope retaining structure in Edmonds, Washington. Our work included a
site reconnaissance, the drilling of three exploratory borings, and providing
recommendations related to the construction of foundations for the proposed project.
SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project site is located on an east facing slope in Edmonds, Washington (refer to
Vicinity Map, Figure 1). The project site is located at the eastern terminus of Viewland
Way. The site is bordered by existing residences to the north and south and an
undeveloped hillside to the east as shown on the Site Plan, Figure 2.
The eastern portion of subject property slopes steeply down to the east at
approximately 2.5 horizontal to 1 vertical. The undeveloped hillside is covered with
numerous shrubs and trees up to 30 inches in diameter.
A shallow footing on the eastern edge of the existing deck has been exposed due to
soil creep and soil erosion. It is proposed to repair the existing wood deck
foundations, to construct additional deck structure along the south and east side of the
residence, and install a slope retaining structure.
FIELD INVESTIGATION
Three exploratory borings were completed on the project site on May 17th of this year.
The approximate boring locations are shown on Site Plan, Figure 2. The borings were
completed with portable drilling equipment using four inch diameter auger. Final
boring depths ranged from 8 to 15 feet below the existing ground surface. The borings
were logged in the field by Meta Engineering personnel, and samples were placed in
air tight plastic bags for further examination in the laboratory. The soils encountered
were classified in general accordance with the ASTM soil classification system.
Summary logs of the explorations are presented in Figures 3 through 5.
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
In general, the soils encountered consisted of 4 to 14 feet of loose to medium dense
brown, gray and dark gray silty sandy fill underlain by dense to very dense, light tan
and gray sand. The existing fill contains trge roots and gravel. Groundwater was not
encountered in any of the borings, however, portions of the fill soils were wet.
Transient groundwater flow probably occurs during wetter periods. For a detailed
description of the soils encountered, refer to the attached boring logs, Figures 3
through 5.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Based upon the results of our field investigation, and review of the existing available
information, we present the following conclusions:
1. The soils encountered on the property are interpreted to be of low compressibility
and adequate shear strength to support foundations for the proposed project.
2. Footings for the deck supports shall be supported by 12 inch diameter drilled shafts
founded on undisturbed native soil, but not more than 8.feet in depth. These footings
shall be designed for bearing pressures of 3,000 psf. The existing deck footings shall
be replaced by similar drilled shaft foundations.
3. A four foot high slope retaining structure shall be installed along the top bank east
of the house. This wall shall be designed for a lateral soil pressure of 35 pcf
equivalent fluid pressure.
4. Water collected from roof gutters and paved areas shall be directed away from the
foundations and slope, and transmitted directly into storm sewer lines. The site in the
area of the new construction shall be graded in such a manner as to direct surface
water away from the foundations.
5. Meta Engineering shall be retained to provide earthwork and foundation
construction inspection services.
UNCERTAINTY AND LIMITATIONS
We have prepared this report for use by the owners of the above -referenced
properties. Our scope of work is limited to the evaluation of the present conditions on
the project site. This report should not be construed as a warranty of the subsurface
conditions. Experience has shown that subsurface soil and groundwater conditions
can vary significantly over small distances. Inconsistent conditions can occur between
explorations and may not be detected by a geotechnical study. If, during future site
operations, subsurface conditions are encountered which vary appreciably from those
described herein, Meta Engineering should be notified for review of the
recommendations of this report, and revision of such if necessary.
This investigation was conducted in accordance with generally accepted professional
principles and practices in the fields of geotechnical engineering and engineering
2
geology in the area at the time this report was prepared. No warranty, expressed or
implied, is made.. The scope of our work did not include environmental assessments
or evaluations regarding the presence or absence of wetlands, or hazardous or toxic
substances in the soil.
We appreciate the opportunity to work with you on this project. Should you have any
questions, please do not hesitate to call.
Sincerely,
Meta Engineering
Paul R. Weber, P.E.
J. David Young
3
i I
I
i
N
f
I
lr
I
FREDERIC
s ti
SNOFVNIS
1�9TH PL
COUNTY
PARK
•
I 12¢
VIEW
•
OVERLOOK." PK
gl eoo tt
185TH
HUET
x n
PL 94 IS >
O
JlJ� pK
4^x
IBTTH
vL SWIB
`
P
89TH5 SW;wTMn
II ='
WATER '4 91
AKE PL I ST SW
husr
L..
i
-CHERR
13
J
ST
a% ` , '
t• u1sT
192HO ST
l r" �A
FOREST 7 1 w
00[ I �[,
° SITE
[6ttS10• �R '
r
w '
/
n R1
D -
ST SW
86M
B
MELODY LN
d
<d
oil
d
/
NIKOIEY Y
BPDOKNERE IK
i0[ERE
EWIANO
Rom
== NIL L P
I -
98TX
d
'ASP
ST = r
ST
---
z
---- 5T <��
s
$� >• <
Tu L STA No
YT u
v[su
,� i
2OOTH
mT
ST 8
UNDINfiBRACKETTS; ? z
BEACH. Q o>
`6 d Ta LEN
SIERM`> a
sTlRimi
>F
NO >
T d�•
`'
' `
` 24 6
fit!
i
-'
•
eE
LEY sT
s,�_
SPRAG41 0
I
6
188
B 19
ST Ei
' /�'
♦ esor a T •o
ELL E ST gal _
ELL
I
A
IN `0 a ST
p9 In
ny
' J
J
na N DAYTON
N
■ r
ST fm IN.._.
`yam,
Y wIPLEST
3 i In[p seo
::-iw' _ %
23
i
ai:'. NDDRJAI: ,.:I
":;.
209TH PL
y
vs A
UNION
OIL
, [n
T
PARK.; `',
! �.' i .. �:; yA,l'EYEt(�
[r
3 R:
�� L
LNUT,
S CEDAR
R
ST a
HMLL WY
m
d
s4•rc[ Kf"0 N 1-P`ARK
it
R
MARSH
`
Z S.
u < ND42r
r: < $SPRUCE
`>I ,TURF"
.r,E 214TH PL
E[Mf7ND5!
p N
° FRm[ S[xUN
IA ,
ST
. ' w "', �
d 215TH = R>
T. sT
e w — I
r.li:4 S.
`
Q
'0➢ ® [ws � e<
8
g �T®d
6 >
�
r; BEACH
- -
U MKAH
r 217TH ST- SII
iR
ON. >
�
26
$
R
ST °n F '<
n3
�
t17TX r SY.
� t eTH• r[r I � 2181H
ST
.
L26
1
BEIU
1fTHBN I :� 2
i .40
A
nX sT E
S T
•d
22
TH �" - ST
0 D
Tad
c.. ..•,minas
a P>
��
•J�
- P
' E 8
BIRM
PL
r
q'
Q'Q•i-
TRC"
ai
I;
;y
A7A
...
14"1
META ENGINEERING
Vicinity Map: 1245 Viewland Way
Scale: N.T.S.
PAUL R. WEBER
Date: 5-27-97
P.O. BOX 77806, SHORELINE, WA 98177
(206) 542-8467
Project No. 97637-01
Plate: 1
L�1;Z►�1�7_�7
DECK
EMI
t
N
META ENGINEERING Site Plan: 1245 Viewland Way Scale:
PAUL R. WEBER
P.O. BOX 77806, SHORELINE, WA 98177 Date: 5-27-97
(206) 542-8467 Project No. 97637-01 Plate: 2
BORING METHOD: 4" OD AUGER
BORING LOCATION: 1245 VIEWLAND WAY
PROJECT NO. 97637-01
BORING: B-1
DATE COMPLETED: 5-17-97
LOGGED BY: JDY
LU Ce
M Uj
LU F-
<
z
0
(n LU Uj
X 0 CL Z)
M
0
<
W < DESCRIPTION V)
Y.
F
SM
FILL: Loose, gray and dark gray, moist, silty SAND with
gravel.
�_'
2
---- ------ ------
5
SM
Medium dense, brown and dark gray, wet, silty SAND.
SM
Very dense, light tan and gray silty and clayey SAND.
-
End of boring at 8', Groundwater not encountered.
10
15
20
meta engineering
P.O. Box 77806 Seattle, Washington 98177
Figure 3
BORING METHOD: 4" OD AUGER
BORING LOCATION: 1245 VIEWLAND WAY
PROJECT NO. 97637-01
BORING: B-2
DATE COMPLETED: 5-17-97
LOGGED BY: JDY
N
QN
J
U
J
m
o N Q DESCRIPTION
-
j:
SM
FILL: Medium dense, brown and dark gray, moist, SAND with
-
gravel.
.j;
-
- very wet at 4'
5
:1
t:
-
- very wet at 8'
10
SM
Dense, brown silty SAND with clay pockets.
.1_5-------
-
End of boring at 15', Groundwater not encountered.
20
meta engineering
P.O. Box 77806 Seattle, Washington 98177
W
Cr
m
W
F-
CL
Z
W
J
a
Q
C)
N
fN
U'
u3
�a
Figure 4
BORING METHOD: 4" OD AUGER
BORING LOCATION: 1245 VIEWLAND WAY
PROJECT NO. 97637-01
BORING: B-3
DATE COMPLETED: 5-17-97
LOGGED BY: JDY
LU CC
V a
Q
?
Z
O
J N W J
= O a a
m M Q O
o N Q DESCRIPTION N N
-
SM
FILL: Loose, brown and dark gray, moist, silty SAND with
1
-
gravel.
2
5
::::::::
SM
Fill: medium dense, light tan and gray, wet, SAND.
...
�
3
-
SM
Very dense, light gray and tan. SAND.
I I
L
4
-
End of boring at 12', Groundwater not encountered.
15
20
meta engineering
P.O. Box 77806 Seattle, Washington 98177
Figure 5
CITY OF EDMONDS
ASSET INFORMATION SHEET
XNEW
❑ ADDITION
❑ RETIREMENT
ASSET NO.
ADDITION TO ASSET NO.
DESCRIPTION W'
SERIAL NO.
LOCATION � � I
DE�'f. NO.
* * PURCHASE ORDER NO.
PURCHASE ORDER DATE
COST
* PROJECT NUMBERS
PROJECT COMPLETION DATE
COST
B.A.R.S. ACCOUNT NO. �OLI i5/ "' DD'
ESTIMATED LIFE
INITIATED BY DATE APPROVED BY
"SUBMIT ASSET INFORMATION SHEET WITH FINAL PAYMENT REQUEST
*SUBMIT ASSET INFORMATION SHEET UPON CLOSE OF PROJECT
ACCOUNTING ONLY
JkDEPRECIATE
MONTHLY DEPRECIATION AMOUNT
el ANNUAL DEPRECIATION AMOUNT
G.L. ENTRY
REFERENCE
b P INITIAL
DATE
VERIFIED BY
PROCESSED
BATCH NO,
DEPARTMENT FILE
Oct-20-97 11:52A meta engineering
206 546-6436
P.01
P0uI R
October 19, 1997
W e b e r, P, E p r
Moose Inc
646 16th Ave West
Kirkland, WA 98033
•
RE: Emergency Permit
Dear Moose:
As stated in my Geotechnical Report, this. property is at risk for a slope failure in the area where
we have designed a slope retaining structure, It is important that this retaining structure be started
as soon as possible. With the onset of an unusually wet Fall, the slope could fail at any time. The
house is quite close to the slope, and some damage could easily occur.
It is my opinion that this property presents an emergency situation where immediate action is
required to prevent or eliminate the threat to health or safety of persons or property, therefore an
exemption exemption under 20,15B.040 is needed.
Sincerely,
Paul R. Weber, P.E.
s. w Ems
E
1
P
0
OMMEe
GEOTECHNICAL & ENVIRONMENTAL
SCIENCE & ENGINEERING
P.O-BOX 77806 Seot-e.WoahIngton 98177 TEL(206)542.8467 FAX (206)546.6436
MICROFILM
H
O
a
II1 \
�r
�m
190.2'
86'8"—
N 6'8"
TYP. NEW 'DURA—LAGG' RETAINING WALL
MAX. HEIGHT 4'0"
94
NEW W0� DECK— 96
a - CK -- — 98
100
AJ
EXISTING RESIDENCE
10'0"
R
DRIVEWAY -
SITE PLAN
Scale: 1" = 20'
OCT 2 8 1991
Geotechnical Report No.
Site Investigation
Proposed Deck Addition
1245 Viewland Way
Edmonds, Washington
May 27, 1997
97637-01
and Retaining Wall
This report presents the results of site explorations and geotechnical engineering
analyses completed to provide recommendations for the construction of a deck
addition and slope retaining structure in Edmonds, Washington. Our work included a
site reconnaissance, the drilling of three exploratory borings, and providing
recommendations related to the construction of foundations for the proposed .project.
SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project site is located on an east facing slope in Edmonds,. Washington (refer to
Vicinity Map, Figure 1). The project site is located at the eastern terminus of Viewland
Way. The site is bordered by existing residences to the north and south and an
undeveloped hillside to the east as shown on the Site Plan, Figure 2.
The eastern portion of subject property slopes steeply down to the east at
approximately 2.5 horizontal to 1 vertical. The undeveloped hillside is covered with
numerous shrubs and trees up to 30 inches in diameter.
A shallow footing on the eastern edge of the existing deck has been exposed due to
soil creep and soil erosion. It is proposed to repair the existing wood deck
foundations, to construct additional deck structure along the south and east side of the
residence, and install a slope retaining structure.
FIELD INVESTIGATION
Three exploratory borings were completed on the project site on May 17th of this year.
The approximate boring locations are shown on Site Plan, Figure 2. The borings were
completed with portable drilling'equipment using four inch diameter auger. Final
boring depths ranged from 8 to 15 feet below the existing ground surface. The borings
were logged in the field by Meta Engineering personnel, and samples were placed in
air tight plastic bags for further examination in the laboratory. The soils encountered
were classified in general accordance with the ASTM soil classification system.
Summary logs of the explorations are presented in Figures 3 through 5.
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS.
In general, the soils encountered consisted of 4 to 14 feet of loose to medium dense
brown, gray and dark gray silty sandy fill underlain by dense to very dense, light tan
and gray sand. The existing fill contains trge roots and gravel. Groundwater was not
encountered in any of the borings, however, portions of the fill soils were wet.
Transient groundwater flow probably, occurs during wetter periods. For a detailed
description of the soils encountered, refer to the attached boring logs, Figures 3
through 5.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Based upon the results of our field investigation; and review of the existing available
information, we present the following conclusions:
1. The soils encountered on the property are interpreted to. be of low compressibility
and adequate shear strength to support foundations for the proposed project.
2. Footings for the deck supports shall be supported by 12 inch diameter drilled shafts
founded on undisturbed native soil, but not more than 8. feet in depth. These footings
shall be designed for bearing pressures'of 3,000 psf. The existing deck footings shall
be replaced by similar drilled shaft foundations.
3. A four foot high slope retaining structure shall be installed along the top bank east
of the house. This wall shall be designed for a lateral soil pressure of 35 pcf
equivalent fluid pressure.
4. Water collected from roof gutters and paved areas shall be directed away from the
foundations and slope, and transmitted directly into storm sewer lines. The site in the
area of the new construction shall be graded in such a manner as to direct surface
water away from the foundations.
5. Meta Engineering shall be retained to provide earthwork and foundation
construction inspection services.
UNCERTAINTY AND LIMITATIONS
We have prepared this report for use by the owners of the above -referenced
properties. Our scope of work is limited to the evaluation of the present conditions on
the project site. This report should not be construed as a warranty of the subsurface
conditions. Experience has shown that subsurface soil and groundwater conditions
can vary significantly over small distances. Inconsistent conditions can occur between
explorations and. may not be detected by a geotechnical study. If, during future site
operations, subsurface conditions are encountered which vary appreciably from those
described herein, Meta Engineering should be notified for review of the
recommendations of this report, and revision of such if necessary.
This investigation was conducted in accordance with generally accepted professional
principles and practices in the fields of geotechnical engineering and engineering
geology in the area at the time this report was prepared. No warranty, expressed or
implied, is made. The scope of our work did not include environmental assessments
or evaluationsregarding the presence or absence of wetlands, or hazardous or toxic
substances in the soil.
We appreciate the opportunity to work with you on this project. Should you have any
questions, please do not hesitate to call.
Sincerely,
Meta Engineering
Paul R. Weber, P.E.
J. David Young
i
1
;
j
I
FREDERIC
—1—
Yhp'[MIIS
.
f``
I �1�9TN PL
12
CO7IHTY
' PARK
`
VIEW
OVERLOOK; �PK
18STN
TM
•ZQi
�?a� MIT
R
PL SW IB >
PK49
p arx
IB7TN
PL Sy
`
ll•�'C1
�4 4y i" �sr h' ,F
i187T
18BIN � J C
oµ Wore
g
�P
89TH S sw
Inrx
�_``\�1
WATER T 8
RE PL 19 s ST SII
D <
OME
'
ST �eY hnn
a
nlst
�sADr"
C
D[ ? 1 V t
�� •n �
. slw MK;R 1
y .
GE
D
HElam LR
�
.60e
8 BRRBRN[RE NIWBIEY V
FWIANO = — W NILL P
! 9BiR
ERE
ASP ST = _
ST e
< ST
` s d
v
----
TE L sT■ r B90
vss " •M 1
'
20DTH
ST 8
BRACKETTS
LARDINGSIERM<>
a
�'
;
`
B[ACH' 9 Q <
< ` GLEN
+ f
L 24 ST
w
v SPs r
RAGD 0
r
ST � C
e >. 19
rryn. o,e
i('•'
o Po 17 • y
• • rr • O.cT a •o
ILL /I[
rlf
ELL ST --_
ELL I
d 2: . RII
i$ A
"IIKi
pia
IN i I ST
on �rL
nsv
DAYTM s . : ST ;N: _. _ .f' ,. !ea ., A e.,,!moy,t'GG � „a
►l�
r'
23
�I. �AL''.'f
ST
S i ALDE '^ p
~ � A WON
LHJT 9 sm � � '• ,..•',i, . •• •yr[L 4a' � v'.� F
to a ! 41•
OIL
t N 'a CEDAR ST of P! t `
HDWELL —WY A
vQ' sw
��
r u SPRUCE W. ST jggN
iJ
l} ,�
t p rTOR 7
lKU' 214TH tt
z •�. i < In■Rts w ` [ L R
[OOIIQS�
P H
p>
tlsM [1157% a
P fG18■t 31 9 s ' H 8§
90
XMIM_
x
r; BFALH
_bf
< � Re I' " 21ITH ST SW aim ' B
II" N < Or D 711M r f„r
in r i A ST � i� a sM, 1 a, 21BTH Si t i
<
_
8[LU COOU
I w 1M �
rit
ELM — [ 221 TN
If 9XON
-- .. 1 .. S_1L.._.
A7A
f
N
SITE
META ENGINEERING Vicinity Map: 1245 Viewland Way Scale: N.T.S.
PAUL R. WEBER
P.O. BOX 77806, SHORELINE, WA 98177 Project No. 97637-01 Date: 5-27-97
(206) 542-8467 Plate: 1
DRIVEWAY
DECK
zm
raxv
f
N
uJ
N N
L.L Z ---pop
03:
a0
Op
META ENGINEERING Site Plan: 1245 Viewland Way Scale: N.T.S.
PAUL R. WEBER
P.O. BOX 77806, SHORELINE, WA 98177 Date: 5-27-97
(206) 542-8467 Project No. 97637-01 Plate: 2
BORING METHOD: 4" OD AUGER
BORING LOCATION: 1245 VIEWLAND WAY
PROJECT NO. 97637-01
BORING: B-1
DATE COMPLETED: 5-17-97
LOGGED BY: JDY
N
N
V
w
a
Q
O
Z
2
J
O
N
W
Ja
Uj
o_
Z)
a
m
N
~
Q'
DESCRIPTION
N
Q
V
O
-
SM
FILL: Loose, gray and dark gray, moist, silty SAND with
1
-
gravel.
5
SM
Medium dense, brown and dark gray, wet, silty SAND.
t
SM
Very dense, light tan and gray silty and clayey SAND.
3
-
End of boring at 8', Groundwater not encountered.
10
15
20
meta engineering
P.O. Box 77806 Seattle, Washington 98177 Figure 3
BORING METHOD: 4" OD AUGER
BORING LOCATION: 1245 VIEWLAND WAY
PROJECT NO. 97637-01
BORING: B-2
DATE COMPLETED: 5-17-97
LOGGED BY: JDY
N
g
W
U
w
g
H
J
}
Z
=
J
m
J
a
Z
n~.
tnn
O
LU C3
N
Q
DESCRIPTION
N
cQn
-
SM
FILL: Medium dense, brown and dark gray, moist, SAND with
1
-
gravel.
-
-very wet at 4'
I'
2
5
�>
3
_
.1
-
- very wet at 8'
10
4
LJ
5
SM
Dense, brown silty SAND with clay pockets.
rr
-
End of boring at 15', Groundwater not encountered.
20
meta engineering
P.O. Box 77806 Seattle, Washington 98177 Figure 4
• BORING METHOD: 4" OD AUGER
BORING LOCATION: 1245 VIEWLAND WAY
PROJECT NO. 97637-01
BORING: B-3
DATE COMPLETED: S-17-97
LOGGED BY: JDY
V)
gw
V
w
f
0
Z
=
J
O
cn
g
W
a
w
a
0
z
Q
O
o
N
DESCRIPTION
N
N
U
-
SM
FILL: Loose, brown and dark gray, moist, silty SAND with
1
-
gravel.
— — -- - ---- - - - --- - - -
['
2
S
:
SM
Fill: medium dense, light tan and gray, wet, SAND.
Ll
3
,
-
:
SM
Very dense, light gray and tan SAND.
4
-
End of boring at 12', Groundwater not encountered.
15
20
meta engineering
P.O. Box 77806 Seattle, Washington 98177 Figure 5
Dennis M. Bruce, P.E.
M.S.C.E., M.B.A. Geotechnical I Civil Engineer
March 9, 2015
City of Edmonds
c/o John Salinas
john@salinasconcrete.com
Subject: Geotechnical Evaluation — As -Built Conditions
Slope Stability, Rockery;:,NewA:Driveway�
246 �e and Way; E' o ds��'
This engineering report presents the results of a geotechnical evaluation and site
inspection for the Salinas property at 1246 Viewland Way, Edmonds, Washington. 1
This evaluation was performed in conjunction with the original building permit for
the new garage, and in response to City of Edmonds concerns (February 27, 2015
Notice by Jennifer Lambert).
REFERENCES:
• Geotechnical Report by D. Bruce, P.E.
• Project plans by Waite Architects
• Inspection and photo reports by D. Bruce, P.E. for the new garage
BACKGROUND:
This engineer provided a geotechnical report and design criteria for the garage
addition project in accordance with the project plans by Waite Architects. City of
Edmonds granted a permit to comply with the plans and specifications, and required
geotechnical inspections by this engineer; with concerns for the rear slope. This
engineer provided inspections and verified that the new garage was properly built with
no adverse impacts to the slope.
It is understood that a historic failing timber retaining wall existed along the
northern property line in the vicinity of the easterly slope. Condition of this railroad tie
wall was hazardous to walking and provided little, if any, slope stability.
It is understood that the property owner replaced the failing railroad tie wall with
a rockery (rockery height varied from 3.0' to a maximum of 6.0'). See photos.
Additionally, some pavement areas were expanded to include a top -of -slope
fence line, some patio areas and some landscaping areas.
SOILS FOUNDATIONS SITE DEVELOPMENT INSPECTION DRAINAGE DESIGN & PERMIT LEGAL o
P.O. Box 56502 Shoreline, Washington 98155 (206) 546-9217 dbrucepe@gmail.com
City of Edmonds
Re: Salinas Property, 1246 Viewland Way
March 9, 2015
Page 2
The City of Edmonds expressed concern regarding the condition of the driveway,
and the proximity of all new work to the rear slope.
ON -SITE INSPECTIONS:
This engineer performed an on -site inspection on March 5, 2015. See photo
sheets.
As previously stated, the recently completed new garage was geotechnically
stable.
• Rockery: This engineer verified that the rockery was properly constructed and
included: Properly sized base rock, proper rock linkage, "blending in" with the
existing topography, excellent gravel drainage and compliance with normal
industry practices for rockeries.
The rockery, as constructed, is geotechnically approved.
• Driveway / Patio Areas: See photo sheets.
This.engineer verified that the form work, reinforcing steel, and crushed rock sub
base complied with good building practices. The new concrete footing area will
provide stability for a future fence line. This new concrete placement does not
create any.significant surcharge tothe slope or the rockery.
As the photo sheets depict, the concrete form work, crushed rock and reinforcing
steel comply with excellent building and foundation practices.
"OK" to proceed with concrete placement.
This engineer understands that project applicant will provide a revised Site Plan
indicating the extent of the pervious and impervious driveway area.
Additionally, this revised Site Plan will depict the rockery location, and heights at
the top -of -slope area.
SUMMARY:
• Geotechnical inspections have verified proper construction of the new garage.
City of Edmonds
Re: Salinas Property; 1246 Viewland Way
March 9, 2015
Page 3
• Additional on -site inspections verified no adverse impact to the slope from the
recent rockery (that replaced the failing timber wall).
• No adverse impacts to the slope, for the (currently) formed area for new
pavement. "OK" to proceed with concrete placement.
If there are any questions, do not hesitate to call.
• Dennis M. Bruce, P.E.
Geotechnical / Civil Engineer
DMB:vIb
1246 Viewland Way. Future fence alignment. Slope stable
Walkway stabilized by rockery. Slope is stable.
New safer walkway.
I' �� 1 e � N`G F'IKA7TX:'P Ai}Lwttl."iS:� d f" '4,w od AM V
4,ti
AYWi� S a
� r _.....w.�..
lY l 1+, t' - il
v
s�...�aa"��'
})r,fwuyMG
i�'�m��
vw'.tyt�l�Y
�, ee^.Gs� x iY il�i x d �Lcx , k�% -
FIRE
BUIU)ING
t
c �� A //lr t
l
�
/! I
////t rr!
�rJ J/r �rl
W, I
�v 3Y
kM f
/r.lf'r
gt,kigE r !
!�"r/�r�'�/!
^ u M f!/l/fllf7
17 t
r,
/r�if1111111M
/T17/7
/r71/11I/.—
�rr'!//
"rcm�> crr�,7�
71%
�r%l%,•/�I/r/y!
77:
irl%l/�r�r��l;-r/�!
1777T�
rlr/+r/mil/-lr!
rlrrr/rr
t °_ RAIN :,
C!/J!
IT J /Y f.'7
I f I I
r
R t r'ru�fnw,.r+wn.«ww.w.r+....o......i...,......+�....,....,.....•.�,�...
t
TPTXC VF'.Rz� Wad
r,
/--
/
-�'p-'p'
11J1
r7T1�/
I I
/Irr7lr
"rl�r//�}r)y/y}/
1 t I/ P f F
;�i"��
.
VT
:- , 6 :,
" IIPI'It k?. 2
rTr;
r
FI-7TI
IT 777
7 TITTFI:
w rsK u,
"'
TT
"�
I/IIIIJ
777777727
I% iTl7f7f
/!illy/I!
7777I,`
rt!!/Jr��
d
ti
NO XIa
lh { NIV
T%nsl,Irif
iT17 71T/- 7
ill!!/I/r
.r7Tf
1777/I I
II/Ir//r
a
ITT I
TiTTii /
/ 7777771
'" wn tasMxxxct� ram.
Iliir
14
TT/ir
�II_!_Irrl!
_
7.1-1 rrl -
/ f
! r
_Ilrll!
r/r,Ir!l/r
irllrrlr!
rI/rr/r/
&77rrl!
1�
1�
7Tdl' I rr
TTi'
yI/IIIIrI
777
a,C37E'it
.�.._
77 l7
�/�
T17
. '.w Y. _
1Ti/
. „Ir/II
%%%I ll
Irli!/rrl
%�f% %
%TW=7
19
r
air `'Ro
rlilr
Irrll)7ll/l.�
Ir/%r�!//r/I
/r/lrr%l/yl/fir/y!/T�
..-.«.
�iP r
I / / / J P /7
T 77 / T
Y I ! / /
21
y:J"N` p S rt�
Iry ft i
! / / / I
/ ! 7 { ! 7 / /
d ! F
7757077
Yr4r y r
" � r a' �i ,�rE 4
1//l/�
rlll/r/!/
s1r/r!///
//////III/
22
7T1t1"
77T
-ITR-lrr
f
/�r/!%ilfl'!1%'
'
"3, i+i? �e 3'lrl liy Aµj a#a '' R P. }U
!!/,�/
J!/F!JJ✓!
%
!if
i�lAa
arm°' 4W, , �_�> > �11,A, x x� , t h`
��m�M �,r��r
t1-IFf l
r/rI/I
/ l �r
�"
%i,T/�'`'i i�
rry(�//y/Jy�e//Jy+IIy,
7T
r!/r/r!///
He
,"ti���,
�}+r�r P S
I l rT
rlrl/I
_/I(y/{yI_r_I_///
/f / /�I
////IIII/
_
`did
tlY 7 Y f 1
/r/////
!!I////I//
to , ,
a`�r
/;��A/
27
"Walls,�,��
�`p�
77 r
l 1/1 1 ?
7! f f l
r
/Ilrrr
T�ITT7777117YT
_//I
._ _
�T
Tii �'i7
71
9
l77T,''T
; "FI/�I`C�/
Tr' 171T
iTi7T"!!/
?'%1l/I%J TT
7/ MTI
E
i //I///`//I/
3
774
/`70177TT7
/7/
/
rrllll_/II
IrIIII!/I
34
�
��r��7'�--p-7�7'/�j�//'TWIT/d//////
i/ 77W
OnA
1
//�J1'`/`IIIJ']''�Y'y_ry'7�-7^�—/'{�'';ill
1a
1T1`11 /
!.'/RT17
n,k
!/r1//
7;'777 I
IIrIlI//I
�
!!!/!//!/
797T/
7rr17i77r
t
j 3 1' � P f r
� :k..
1•
rt;S a
!lyI%'(/7�r/r/�
'li
.S77 77
r
ilk
����
CITY OF EDMONDS ZONE
CONSTRUCTION PERMIT APPLICATION 5-i Z
NUMBER
-�� TELEPHONE
a CITY TELEPHONE NUMBER
ADDRESS
PUBLIC RIGHT
'�O�jFaF J -� WAY PER OFFICIAL STREET MAP.
EXISTING
'Y.�f REQUIRED DEDICATION
PROPOSED_
RIGHT OF WAY CONSTRUCTION PERMIT REQUIRED t�
STREET USE PERMIT REQUIRED
SEE ENGINEERING MEMO DATED Q /
NAME
rre�
ADDRE&S
Q�
METER SIZE BUILDING SUPPLY SIZE
FIXTURE UNITS
CITY y� , ` q� / TELEPHONE NUMBER
(J xz ..> 1 Y iJ �U''' J� 1.t'`} -7
REMARKS
STATE LICENSE NUMBER
i/ -0- C n (; j) XV
Legal Description of Property - Include all easements
(show below or attach four copies)
SIGN AREA ENV. REVIEW ADB NO.
ALLOWED PROPOSED COMPLETE EXEMPT .
SHORELINE N
(~ A MNCE OR CU PLANNING REVIEW BY DATE
YARDS
HEIGHT LOT COVERAGE
FRONT SIDE REAR
REMARKS
NEW UM RESIDENTIAL
PLUMBING
�r
ADDIALTER D COMMERCIAL
El MECHANICAL
LREPAIR C� RETAINING WALL
El SIGN
1 CEXCAVATE
J DEMOLISH OR FILL
17-1 PRE -MOVE INSPJ
REMODEL COMPIJAN.CE INSP.
❑ WO INSERT OD VE/ APT. BLDG
FENCE
❑ L_ x `.FT)
SWIM
POOL
RENEWAL
CHECKED BY TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION CODE HEIGHT
IT:-N
/ 7?2 ZS--
SPECIAL INSPECTOR JAREA JOCCUPANCY OCCUPANT
REQUIRED GROUP rJ� LOAD
NO �l
REMARKS
NUMBER OF STORIES NUMBER OF
PR06R2sS �NSP�cr70rys AeA
G[BG 3L1S"
[DWELLING
UNITS
NATURE OF WORK TO BE DONE (ATTACH PLOT PLAN)
It P7 rA1Y_11 T 4- V pin
PLAN CHECK FEE
BUILDING
PLUMBING
MECHANICAL
This Permit covers wort( to be done On private property ONLY.
GRADINGIFILL
Any construction on the public domain (curbs, sidewalks,
driveways, marquees, etc.) will require separate permission.
STATE SURCHARGE
Permit Application: 180 Days
Permit Limit: I Year- Provided Work Is Started Within 180 Days
ENERGY CODE
"Applicant, on behalf of his or her spouse, heirs, assigns and
successors In Interest, agrees to indemnity, defend and hold
s
harmless the City of Edmonds, Washington, its officials,
employees, and agents from any and all claims for damages of
==
whatever nature, arising directly or Indirectly from the issuance
of this permit. Issuance of this permit shall not be deemed to
PLAN CHECK DEPOSIT
modify,. waive or reduce any requirement of any city ordinance
i
'
nor limit in any way the City's ability to enforce any ordinance
TOTAL AMOUNT DUE
provision."
1 hereby acknowledge that I have read this application; that the
Information given Is correct; and that i am the owner, or the duly
ATTENTION
i, authorized agent of the owner. I agree to comply with city and
state laws regulating construction; and In doing the work authoriz-
THIS PERMIT
AUTHORIZES
ed thereby, no person will be employed In violation of the Labor
ONLY THE
Code of the State of Washington relating to Workmen's Compensa-'
WORK NOTED
ti n Ins nc
fir' SIGNNA JR (OWNER O ,7AGENT/)/ ATE SIG D
INSPECTION
DEPARTMENT
E J r /JWj,,�.
r'vt�2l'/ N' S s i
CITY OF
EDMONDS
REM
ATTENTION
771.3202
IT IS UNLAWFUL TO USE OR OCCUPY A BUILDING OR STRUCTURE
UNTIL A FINAL INSPECTION HAS BEEN MADE AND APPROVAL OR
A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY HAS BEEN GRANTED. UBC
CHAPTER 3.
VALUATION
APPLICATION APPROVAL
This application is not a permit until
signed by the Building Official or his
Deputy; and fees are paid, and receipt is
acknowledged in space provided.
OFFICIAL'S SIGNATURE DATE
RELEASED BY:
DATE
C7
Z
it
w
Z
w
w
3
0
Z
Z
z
ORIGINAL - File YELLOW - Inspector Li
PINK - Owner GOLD - Assessor
1
H99�O�lILE1N��L€
FOR: MR. 8 MRS MIKE PALMER11
LOT ♦6 --ll
Z
i U
jR 11
O
s � 8
DWARD APJDO?T -
F$- �.--:t \t ;i+'�7 d.a> SP,p' ., b� .. .,... s P• .t -. , �;-'i_ i - , , ��'Y i f 's . •� c41 s44Pi. `s'...
,r.4;
V l
'CITY OF��EDMONDS�"•
usE. PERMIT?
zoriE06 I
R
„KCONSTR.UCTION PERMIT< AP.PUCATION.::
NUMBER
JOe
, .-
ADDRESS SUITE/APT q
OWNER NAME[NAMErOF BUSINESS
LEGAL D SCfiIPTION CHECK SUED VI ON NO'LID.NO
- y ��•'. '-. ,• _, ` - '..
;
Z MAILING;AUVRESS -
4
'
PUBLIC RIGHT;OF WAY' PER -OFFICIAL STREET MAP.' TESCP Approved O
CITY IP
TELEPHONE UMBER
(..
RW Permit Required O 'EXISTING NEOUIREDDEDICATION
Street Use Permit Req'd CT
PROPOSED ' "'Inspection Required
SidewalkRequired -
NAME
r`
W
ADDRESS
❑'
cc
METE S12E. ,LINE SIZE NO.OF FIXTURES' PRV REQUIRED Q
7�} , '
y
O
aa
r' b t O : C JO
N / 1` YES O NO O 3
REMARKS O
2
�p�c, -.-,. / e�
_b ;� w
CITY °'ZIP`
A IVM7 8
TELEPHONE NUMBER
A2 qI
Z
NAME
ENGINEPRIN 'AAEMO'DATED
ac
AD RESS:
•.{ _ 1 - __ _ :
1 �:...•,.. •:...
.,.n.
/ w �.. EVIEWEDBY' . •'..
Y
IR
CITY ZIP.
ELEPHO E NUMBER.LL�J.
p
1 A r�yc
�9
FIRE MEMO DATED
REVIEWED BY
cc
, .. r
ST TE LICE E N MBEf
. PIRA ION DAT
f O l�'
r h
Legal . escription•of Property - include all ease ent
.VARIANCE OR CU ADSA SHOREL'I� '
Z
O
a
.+ , 1, f ��(
V �J T1
SEPA REVIEW .. SIGN AREA HEIGHT
,COMPLETE- EXEMPT ALLOWED.- PROPOSED 'ALLOWED PROPOSED
_• ..
;
` .
LOT. CO ' REOUIRED'SETBACKS (FT.); : PROPOSED:SETBACKS (FT)J: _
ALLOWED , ;PROPOSED' FRONT; SIDE _REAR. FRONT .L/R:SIDE REAR ;
c
:,-
.
Q
.• Z
Proms
P$Iccount ^t'-7qC bo(� Ojl'(�' b)�Q,
LOT AR - - EA un-
a
❑1
NEW ?: RESIDENtIAL I PLUMS GfMECH
a COMPLIANCE
CI
RE KS : c
OR
IT. N• '. co CHANGE OF USE
/� (� G
6IM0 C-1,k�d i0 �9.7 TC•�"e
EJAEMODEL .'APT RLbGi ' i❑
SIGN
Xep u' 'Q rni�if/1/�/ Ti���ti ( rI�`�
r
GRADING,_- -' a FENCE' ._,
CHECKED BY, TYPES pF CONSTRUCTION CODE .
.REPAIRCYDS:X_FT)
WOODSTOVE-
!CC UP
T-WR
DEMOLISH SwIM POObPA
INSERT HOT
SPECIAL INSPE TO AREA
REQUIRED OCCUPANT
GARAGE RETAINING,WALL/ __
C,AgRbRT' ROCKERY. `, a
... YES LOAD
RENEWAL
REMARKS
m!PE aF,USt= auslNEss oR;ncTlVl v�'ExeLa1N:'
PROGRESS INSPECTIONS.;PER 68. Z:
.UB,C
c
,A�•m
at h y�
�7
O
:NUMBER NUMBER OF CRITICAL
•OF DWELLING
-
{p
.AREAS -;
'STORIES. - UNITS -' :' V�`� I�
O
n
. .... NUMBER t..'.-
IDESCRIBEwORK•TO BE DONE (ATTACH PLOT PLAN)--
;...aY'sUv:-
-
1 tt
FINAL.INSPECTION REQUIRED
,..
. W• t V U
I V of
VALUATION
FEE ..
:PLAN CHECK FEE '
;�• fA ..- t >! i L� t 1�i _
1 V.
-
HEAT,SOURCE:
~GLAZING
BUILDING
40
"-
.PLUMBING
MECHANICAL
, - -`•Plan`-Check-No'.
✓
; 'g "�DINGIFILL.
This Permit covers work to be.done On-prival#e property,'ONLY -;'
Any;construction-on the
pubiic.domain(curbs; sidewalks
i 'PermIlAppl
_- driveways;.. marquees;.efC) wilrreGUire Separate, permission
STATE SURCHARGE
on 180 Days,
+
PerrnN liinit: l'Year Provided Wo* IS Started Within 180 Days
'ri1
3
ENG.INSPECTION FEE
3 (�
- .'`Applicant, on behalfof his or herapouse; heirs assigns and
,successors in interest, agrees: to indemnify, defend .and hold'
w herm113ss the City • of Edmonds Wi;ishingtoli' t� f•ficials
employees, .and agents:.from ahy end silt claims fore
` �� _ t
o ges of`
a 'iNhateveimature, arising:directly. 1 directl`yarom'•tFt r suance
Of thls'p@rmIt. ISSuande Ofethis perrrlit shall'nOl-be'de med 10
o ;
PLAN_ CHECK. DEPOSIT 1
aU
modify;; , a or'reduce any requirerrient of: any city brdinance;:
'In
M not limit any Way. the City's 6bliify to enforce any.ordinance
provision;
TOTAL AMOUNT- fit
} ,I here'bti:acknoWledge,.that I have`read this application; that the
tlnformation 4'1Venjs,correct andahat l•am the owner, or:the'duly
ATTENTION APPLICATION APPROVAL
�atithdriz6d-abenfof the owner. 1 agree .to comply with .'clty and
state laws
cegulating.Construction;aand In doing 'the work"eUthoriz=
ed thereby;;no -the.
THIS. PIRM,d. •;
AUTHORIzes This application is not a .permit until
person- wilUb� employed In violation of Labor
_Code of;t*he:State of Washington relating -to Workmen's.Compe.nsa-
ONLY THE signed by the Building: Official or his/her -
WORK NOTED'
tion'Irisu,'(OWN and'.RGW 1827
Deputy; and fees are paid, and receipt is
- >..
INSPECTION acknowledged in space:provided;
DEPARTMENT'
OFFICIAL'S SIGNATURE
SIGNATURE;(OWNER'OR"AGENT► DATE -SIGNED, -
CYJ
V•v,` �u" J' ��� T
CITY 'OF' DATE,
EDMONDS.
.
dTTENTION
CALL FOR R LE S Yq7/ TE
INSPECTION:
IT
!IS UNLAWFUL. TO; USE OR OCCUPY A BUILDING"OR TRUCTURE`
UNTIL,A
A
FINAL:INSPECTION HAS A
-BEEN MADE AND P,.RO.VAL OFF.:
`.CERTIFICATE'. OF OCCUPANCY,..
I
�� �0220 RIGINAL.— File. YELLOW
HAS BEEN GRANTED.. UBC
—Inspector
SECTION.109'
'
t02-0r,
PINK— .Owner GOLD — Assessor