The URL can be used to link to this page

15910 72ND AVE W (2).PDFIIIIIIIIIIII5590 15910 72ND AVE W E51 '1 ADDRESS: TAX ACCOUNT/PARCEL NUMBER: DD �` om O` BUILDING PERMIT (NEW STRUCTURE): /�/ j� �j /��{ p� COVENANTS (RECORDED) FOR: 11D([y / -O 1VcsS -1 90e101014 CRITICAL AREAS: �D/ETERMIN�AT/ION: El Conditional Waiver Study Required ❑Waiver DISCRETIONARY PERMIT #'S: !� T 7/ � �eIX4 ,L DRAINAGE PLAN DATED: -3/�69s PARKING AGREEMENTS DATED: EASEMENT(S) RECORDED FOR: PERMITS (OTHER): % gVS3 3 14�oYf / 01V qcq PLANNING DATA CHECKLIST DA SCALED PLOT PLAN DATED:_ 605 98 SEWER LID FEE $: LID #: ;-7 0 SHORT PLAT FILE: J p LOT: BLOCK: SIDE SEWER AS BUILT DATED: SIDE SEWER PERMIT(S) #: GEOTECH REPORT DATED: ✓�v! ` �/ STREET USE / ENCROACHMENT PERMIT WATER METER TAP CARD DATED: 7— OTHER: cP�4-p 410CV1vifi6V {/�f /� /onroj � , ,D��ri7L t 1(6a LATEMP\DSTs\Forms\Street File Checklist.doc lll� GARAGE ED 0 a.m- O • 3' 13' m 45' 66" 4" PVC 37' 18' 6" C/O TO GRADE ;T IRON FRAME & LID C_ w Q 0 z (n N cn z. cis z 6" PVC V) X W V) CITY OF EDMONDS SIDE SEWER AS- BUILT ADDRESS: PERMIT9071 15910 72ND A V E W N CONTRACTOR: HOMEOWNER. SCALE: SPRINCHILL, LLC PAULA HARB I NTS DATE INSPECTED INSPECTED DATE DRAWN. DRAWN 9122199 BY. -UNKNOWN 812106 BY. J. BRONDER gi; CITY OF EDMONDS 890.19 c, Address of Construction: A vf- (Jf-!,T- 7—E-)001�r:::5 9d -DA YS. SIDE SEWER PERMIT PERMIT �10 1,4- 0071 LyNNW0 I Property Legal Description (Include all easements): OD LIN P&I P_ OF C_ K I _S t-/ Al Cr- C 0 &J S tf, Ct C. r 16 AJ -TN f- a X 5 r Z- C�'4 r- 3 3 3 Y rl � o 0 0,-J 4 A L_ 0- 60A c It- T_ -tt- S13300003 Owner and/or Contractor: Ld tJ E P, / PA U LA CoNr_ (i (L C State License No. 6) L Z I 6J A;,f�7__'Building Permit No. Single Family Invasion into City Right -of -Way: 0 No bd Yes ❑ Multi -Family (No. of Units-) RW Construction Permit No. JOE] Commercial Cross .-pither Private Prpp !��ty� No Yes ❑ Public -�,,.-.,�ttach,legpl d6s6ript!on at)d" �,J': , " I . .,qQpy of:recorded easement f ! k. UL, � Is I certify that I have read and shall comply with ri�`r?knts ith all city require Datd as indicated on the back of the Permit Card. CALL DIAL -A -DIG (1-800-424-5555) BEFORE ANY EXCAVATION OFFICE USE ONLY FOR INSPECTION CALL 771-3-202, PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. Permit Fee: ssue Id B. Trunk Charge: Date Issued. Assessment Fee: Receipt No.: Lid No.: Partial Inspection(2A--,r =-CM13 kv-\ Date 2_>/V Initial Comments � Reason Rejected: DateInitial i POT 4111di i Final Inspection Approved: Date -Initial - b) -)I - 06 0-L - I PERMIT MUST BE POSTED ON JOB SITE White Copy: File Green Copy: inspector Buff Copy: Applicant Revised 3!90 AL I'll Michael A. George 16, 1998 13 T-1;FF 7FILE. aes Walker i 141 JL11 C1Yli 1V. 'i Edmonds, WA 98020 ,` ab � ADD (z v0 �X Subject: Harb/Glantz Re odel - Storm drainage 'Polo ,gyp I � ti7 Site Address: 15910 72nd Ave. W. o 15 .i Dear Mr. Walker, I am presently working on an extensive residential remodel for Paula Harb and her mother Barbara Glantz at the site address listed above which is in the Meadowdale Beach Area. We have applied for and recieved approval for a small height variance Architect ( V97-147 ). A.I.A., P.S. i. (360) 568-1331 The public works review of our variance request stated that we would need to (360) 568.1930 provide on -site detention if 2,000 s.f. of impervious area has been added since I:aX 1979.Our proposal including a 2-car garage which was added in 1988 will add approximately 1350 s.f. which according to both Gordy Hyde and Don Fiene would exclude us from the requirement of providing on -site detention. The 1350 s.f. does not include.a.small and large deck that will be constructed of 2 x 4 spaced cedar decking. During a meeting with Gordy Hyde on 2-10-98 he said that spaced decking which is open to the grade below would be considered to a pervious surface. The two decks total approximately 1350 s.f. of spaced -cedar decking area. During this same meeting Mr. Hyde said we' will not need to provide a drainage plan by a licensed P.E. since the storm drainage for our additions will connect to the existing storm drains which are tight -lined to two existing catch -basins located at 72nd and below the west side of our site. However, Mr. hyde will require a rOaii statement from our Geotechnical Engineer- stating. that -our new impervious areas Y"ki�_ will be connected to our existing tight -lines as an acceptable, not detrimental C� method for storm drainage. This has been done and is included in his soils report. r ef After my meeting with Gordy Hyde I spoke with Mr. Don Fiene by telephone on 2-25-98 for confirmation of the above information regarding the pervious surface and detention requirements. Mr. Fiene verified the information I recieved from Mr. Hyde and in addition stated that we would not be required to seek any kind of 922 approval from Burlington Northern for the drainage of our site. First Street Snohomish, WA 9 8 2 9 0 I -2- We have been preparing our construction drawings based on the information provided to me by your engineers and anticipate a submittal date of around 3-25-98. If you have additional comments that would impact our project I would appreciate a response as soon as you have time. Thank you for your assistance.:with this project and I look forward to hearing from you. .i: ii Respectfully, Michael A. George AIA L� HARB/GLANTZ REMODEL ; March 8, 1998 Cgnglusions and Recommendations nrl: Job Number 7108 Page 3 The following general geotechnical conclusions can be drawn from our field and laboratory test data: 1) The existing fills are not capable of providing foundation support to the proposed structures. Excavation to the medium -dense to very dense silty fine sands below the fills is required. 2) Conventional footings bearing on medium -dense silty sand can be designed for a bearing pressure of 2000 pounds per square foot (psf). 3) The site is sensitive to moisture. We recommend footing drains around. all uphill sides of footings at the elevation of the footings. Positive drainage to an appropriate drainage structure is recommended. 4) Slabs -on -grade, if they are being considered, should be underlain with at least six inches of free -draining sand. In addition, a visquine barrier is recommended. 5) Soils with a high percentage of silt and/or clay (>15%) are moisture sensitive and difficult to impossible to utilize as structural fill is the soil is more than two to three percent wetter or drier than the optimum moisture content at the time of compaction. The soils at this site do have considerable silt, and are. moisture sensitive. 6) Temporary excavation slopes should not exceed 1:1 (Horizontal: Vertical). Flatter slopes may be required depending on site conditions. If steeper slopes vAe, 3 through the fill soils are required, shoring may be necessary. It is our understand that existing and new impervious surface storm drainage will be connected to existing tight lines that connect to the City of Edmonds storm drainage system. This is acceptable. 8) Provided the recommendations of this report are applied in design and construction, it is our opinion the addition/remodel will not create. the potential of soil movement or risk of harm or damage to existing uses or development, or to public safety. 9) A safe setback distance for the western downslope is twenty-five (25) feet. A safe setback for the northern upslope is generally ten (10) feet, although this distance could possibly be reduced for small isolated cases, if required. 10) No additional fill should be placed on.. the site without 'our approval. In general, no fill should be placed between the structure and the downslope to the south or west. P` - `�. `_PE_l VW Si•SURFACE- KEY tA .... ...... — -- ----- _ Q�R';)LG.1,�12+ L_iiOLJ SE_l 9 7.5 f c co120 P` �\�' Cj : 25;5p'5 .s ftl: — - —--.�•�;�: �?.N_1.98.$.- --_ _L'►_34.�..e Q� 0.59 oc�s - - Q 9i ` \ �.• � J i k zo ti m 110 d \ to N FOUND CRIMPED 1 ' .: a .. • • ►� . '. IRON PIPE, - _ N t- V./ � �o ` • • • 0 ' CKl4-�'�;��1�,4'irp_ _.�..+ • N �o 8.93 NORTH BY .�j- ,• • • - . 8.14 WEST ' ` TOE SLOP " ' N 89'5700E - `. '. . -�. wto�-_ ' 'r'.+--�'.;a2�2081� - - .;,k•�� z^^"LR - � - •• •- 25.00 ►— NI k." ' -¢' y ' — Lia Lu 0- 1?ECL N O \ . 0000 APP�OX. LOCATIO OF LINE.�(FIEJOWER D .VERIFY). ' Z 25.0 co :a New:• ' � ; ;� � .,�;;.? r'I'• - ASPH:A'lT-D.RiV� - v `• '. Llj GLANTZAR REMODEL Q 105.28 -H EP H.644.39 sq.ft. Q (D to 0.61 ocres 89 GARAGE OOR wv FOUND CRI D \ 6.67 Fze�'tou IRON PIPE N 89-53 00 E 230.29 (HELD AS E. COR 105.28 LOT 33) �wr��, .10.00, I 96 s4 .... , . �... , 4" CONC, fi �CB.�t\..... yr_-n-r n' IC—• RECVVD CITY of EDMQJDS 1 r (71 For Inspecti n 1a14 771-3L vss-'2 A 9 � 3 ddress of Construction: .Property Legal Descriptio Owner and/or Builder: Contractor & License No i - S gl:e - Family Residence MW 1 1 1885 4WORMS (Include all easements) . SJJE SEWER PERMIT PERMIT M_!Z2_b66* - �� Z s �� X__74. Multi -Family (No.- of Units '7.. of fixtu,re 'Units, - Invasion into City Right -of- Way: No Yes (If Yes, Right -of -Way Construction Permit required. Call One-Cal'l-Center (1-800-,1424-5555) before any excavation.) Cross other Private Property: No ✓ Yes (If Yes, easement required, attach legal description and county easement number.) PLEASE READ 16E ITEMS LISTED ON . THE BACK I' -certify —that I haverea �d and shall comply .,with the items listed on the back. Date Permit Fee: 30. 00 Issued By: Trunk Charge: COO Date Issued: Assessment Fee: Receipt No.: - Partial Inspection: qWA1-T1M(-N r'0K1V-3(_7-C:T10t'J' Azr IAOUSE Comments Date Initial Final Inspection Approved: Ira Date Initial 00 Rejected: CD Reason Date Initial PERMIT MUST BE POSTED ON JOB SITE White Copy File Green Copy - Inspector Buff Copy Applicant Side Sewer Drawing The City of Edmonds EASEMENT NO_ ---------------------- -------- (ACAD. carom . NEW CONSTRUCTION Fl REPAIRS n LID NO. 1-IQ ------ ASMT. NO - ------------------ OWNER -PAU-L ---- GAIAtaT-77 — --------------------- ----------------- CONTRACTOR ------- REIM - ------ G-L R-NI-T;4� Wt 4 JAIEN... PERMIT No. 748 JOB ADDRESS --- --------------- LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT NO. E--y2-----L.CFV -34 ------- BLOCK NO- ------------------------------------ ---------------- _D --- --------------- - ----- ------------------ ---------------------- ----------------------------------- NIMEOF ADDITION I ----------------- I ----- --------- -- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- PWW-0001 -11/75 (REV. 11/78) ' ----- lBy.,O& D ------ -------- 4/,% 710, P'X-3- • .ninnne OEOSCIENCES INC. Post Office Box 2385 Kirkland, WA 98083 Telephone (425) 827-1084 Facsimile (425) 828-9443 Paula Harb 6919 — 16P Place Southwest Edmonds, WA 98026. APR - U ItZ Subject: Geotechnica.l Engineering Report Harb/Glantz Remodel '15910 — 72`d Avenue West Edmonds, Washington Dear Ms. Harb: BILE Job Number 7108 March 8, 1998 We are pleased to present our Geotechnical Engineering Report for the proposed remodel of the existing residence at 15910 — 72' d Avenue West in Edmonds, Washington. The purposes of our work were to professionally evaluate subsurface soil and groundwater conditions, evaluate slope stability and provide safe setback recommendations, recommend general procedures for the grading and underslab treatment, and recommend a reasonable foundation system. The scope of our services included: 1) Logging and sampling two test borings drilled to a maximum depth of 41.5 feet below existing grades. The test borings were located in a manner to provide broad coverage of the lot considering site access. The test borings were drilled with a truck -mounted drill rig and logged by the professional geologist. Selected samples were taken of subsurface soils. 2) Reviewing collected soil samples in our office, and assigning appropriate laboratory tests consisting of moisture content and sieve gradation tests. At the conclusion of the testing program, laboratory results were analyzed and compared with field notes and logs. 3) Preparation of this summary report in accordance with our Proposal No. 7024, our understanding of project requirements, and generally recognized local geotechnical engineering practices. No other warranty is expressed or implied. Plate 1, attached, provides the guidelines in the use of this report. Project Understandings: This office was provided with a site plan which documented site conditions including boundary lines, existing structure location and remodel plans, and site topography. Our knowledge of this project is generally limited to the information on this site plan and our discussions with the architect. We anticipate the new remodel will be a wood -frame and multiple storied. HARB/GLANTZ REMODEL Job Number 7108 March 8, 1998 page 2 General Site _nditions — Surface:' The proposed work consists of remodeling the existing structure at 15910 — 72"d Avenue West in Edmonds, Washington. The attached Vicinity Map, Plate 2, shows the general vicinity of the site. At the time of our fieldwork, the site was fully developed with the existing residence and mature ground :.over, including some trees. Near the structure, the property had a gentle to moderate slope down to the south and west. There is a relatively steep slope down to the west some distance from the house and a relatively steep slope up just north of the existing residence. Subsurface Explora ion and Description: Two test borings were drilled with a truck -mounted drill rig to a maximum depth of 41.5 feet below existing grades at the locations shown on the Site Plan, Plate 3. The test borings were logged and sampled by a professional geologist during the drilling process. The test boring logs are attached to this report. Recovered soil samples were subjected to moisture content and sieve gradation tests. Test results and field density information are summarized on the test boring logs and attached plates. Although there may very well be some variation in the subsurface and/or conditions may not be readily apparent from the ground surface, we expect the following subsurface interpretation will be essentially correct: The site is overlain with six to seven feet .of loose to medium -dense silty sandy soil. This surficial soil appears to be fill that was most probably pushed away during the initial excavation for the existing structure. Underlying the fill and any buried topsoil is a medium -dense to very dense silty fine sand with lenses of sandy silt. Although the soils were very wet during our fieldwork, no standing groundwater table was noted during drilling. The final test boring logs attached to this report present our of interpretation the field data and laboratory tests. The stratification lines on the logs represent approximate boundaries between soil types at the exploration location. In actuality, the transition may be gradual. The relative densities and moisture descriptions on the logs are interpretive descriptions based on observed conditions during excavation. The logs should be reviewed for specific subsurface information at each location tested. HARB/GLANTZ REMODEL ; March 8, 1998 onclUsions and Recommendations General: Job Number 7108 Page 3 The following general geotechnical conclusions can be drawn from our field and laboratory test data: 1) The existing fills are not capable of providing foundation support to the proposed structures. Excavation to the medium -dense to very dense silty fine sands below the fills is required. 2) Conventional footings bearing on medium -dense silty sand can be designed for a bearing pressure of 2000 pounds per square foot (psf). 3) The site is sensitive to moisture. We recommend footing drains around all uphill sides of footings at the elevation of the footings. Positive drainage to an appropriate drainage structure is recommended. 4) Slabs -on -grade, if they are being considered, should be underlain with at least six inches of free -draining sand. In addition, a visquine barrier is recommended. 5) Soils with a high percentage of silt and/or clay (>15%) are moisture sensitive and difficult to impossible to utilize as structural fill is the soil is more than two to three percent wetter or drier than the optimum moisture content at the time of compaction. The soils at this site do have considerable silt, and are moisture sensitive. b) Temporary excavation slopes should not exceed 1:1 (Horizontal: Vertical). Flatter slopes may be required depending on site conditions. If steeper slopes through the fill soils are required, shoring may be necessary. 7) It is our understand that existing and new impervious surface storm drainage will be connected to existing tight lines that connect to the City of Edmonds stone drainage system. This is acceptable. 8) Provided the recommendations of this report are applied in design and construction, it is our .opinion the addition/remodel will not create the potential of soil movement or ,risk of harm or damage to existing uses or development, or to public safety. 9) A safe setback distance for the western downslope is twenty-five (25) feet. A safe setback for the northern upslope js_generally ten (10) feet, although this distance could possibly be reduced for small isolated cases, if required. 10) No additional fill should be placed on the site without our. approval. In general, no fill should be placed between the structure and the downslope to the south or west. . HARB/GLANTZ REMODEL Job Number 7108 March 8, 1998 Page 4 Foundations: The proposed new structures may be supported on conventional continuous and spread footings bearing on the medium -dense to very dense silty fine sand underlying the fill and topsoil. Over -excavation below design footing et nths is requ dense to hard native siredoil gs may bear on compacted structural fill built up from comp All footings should bear at a minimum depth of 1.5 feet below finish grades. A bearing pressure of two thousand (2000) psf may be assumed for footings bearing directly on the medium -dense to very dense silty fine sand. Footings bearing on compacted structural fill may also be designed for a maximum bearing preonsure of two thousand e-third d to accommodate(short)psf tenm The design bearing pressure may be increased byne wind and seismic loads. To provide protection against shear failure, we recommend continuous and spread footings have minimum widths of sixteen (16) inches and twenty- four (24) inches, respectively. Structural fill or crushed rock that is placed under footings should extend out beyond the edges of the footings a minimum distance equal to one-half the fill depth. For example, if two feet of structural fill was placed - under a sixteen -inch -wide footing, the total minimum width of the fill (and therefore the footing excavation) would be forty inches. We estimate that footings bearing on the medium -dense silty fine sand or on compacted structural fill will settle approximately one-half (1/2) inch between building corners or for every forty feet of continuous footing distance. Lateral loads such as wind and seismic forces are accommodated by friction between the foundation elements and the bearing soils and by passive -earth pressure against the foundations. However, passive earth pressure is only available if compacted structural fill is used to backfill against the foundations, or the foundations are poured against the existing soil. The passive resistance of undisturbed native soil and properly compacted structural fill may be assumed to be an equivalent fluid pressure of three hundred (300) pounds per cubic foot (pcO. Seismic Desiun1 The site is classified as Seismic Zone 3 by the Uniform Building Code. We recommend the designer utilize site soil coefficient SD in their analysis. Job Number 7108 HARB/GLANTZ REMODEL page S March 8, 199.3 ii P Linage: d away from The site should be graded during construction so that su ebeater is allowed to pond where any excavation and all downslopes. Water should not foundations, pavements, or slabs are to be constructed. r a Final site grades adjacent to the buildings should be sloped daway from the structure o an minimum distance of ten feet. Roof and surface water should discharge to appropriate facility. Footing drains are required on all uphill sides of the footings, and should ered with a minimum consist of six slotted four -inch -diameter PVC pipe bedded in, and co inches of drain rock. The invert of the pipe should be placed at the elevation of the footings. A non -woven geotextile fabric (Mirafi 140N, Supac 4NP, or other equivalent) should be wrapped around the outside of the drain rock. The PVC pipe should be sloped to drain, and may be connected to the roof and surface water discharge pipe down - gradient and away from the structures. The pipes should discharge to an appropriate discharge facility. Excavations and S1Qves: Temporary and permanent excavation and slopes for this project must meet all applicable government safety regulations. Temporary cuts to a depth of four feet may be attempted vertical, although they will probably not hold. Excavation slopes greater than four feet in depth should be cut no steeper than 1:1 (Horizontal:Vertical) for the entire depth of the cut. Flatter slopes may be required depending upon location variations in soils conditions and whether there is groundwater present. Contractors working in excavations should use caution at all times. Sudden caving of the side slopes is possible. Permanent cut and fill slopes which. are not otherwise reinforced should not exceed 2:1 (H:V)• General Ell: Site construction should begin by stripping and safely clearing the building areas of all vegetation, fill soils, organic -rich topsoil, and any other deleterious material. Stripped materials may have to be removed from the site. Groundwater beepreparage ed tos noted accommodate our fieldwork. The contractor should anticipate, moderate to heavy seepage into even shallow excavations. /GLANTZ REMODEL Job Number 7108 HARE Page 6 March 8, 1998 Structural fill is defined as any fill placed below structures, including slabs, where the fill soils would need to support loads without unacceptable deflections or shearing. Structural fill should be placed above unyielding native site soils in maximum eight -inch - thick loose lifts and compacted to a minimum -of 95%. of Modified Proctor (ASTM D1557). Soil is typically difficult fo'place and compact as structural fill if more than three percent from the optimum moisture content at the time of compaction. During wet weather or under wet conditions, structural fill should consist of a granular soil having less than five percent silt or clay (measured on that portion which passes the'/4-inch sieve). During dry weather, water may have to be added to the soil to achieve the required soil density. Wet Weather Construction: If the site is developed during extended periods of wet weather or in the winter, the following w-e anticipated additional costs and changes which should be anticipated: 1) Excavated slopes and fill piles will have to be protected with plastic. 2) Most, if not all of the excavated soils will be unusable as structural fill. 3) Foundation excavations will required over -excavation on the order of six inches to one foot), and replacement with crushed rock. 4) Numerous site visits will be required by this office to evaluate soil conditions, confer with the contractor, and make remedial recommendations. 5) Costs of maintaining the site and cleaning adjacent streets/property will increase. Closure: It is recommended we be retained to review the final development plans to verify site specific subsurface requirements are met and our recommendations have been accurately interpreted in the plans. It is also recommended that we be retained to provide professional geotechnical consultation and observation services during design and construction. This allows us to: 1) Confirm that design conforms to specific subsurface requirements; 2) Confirm that subsurface soils conditions exposed during construction are consistent with those indicated by this report; 3) Evaluate whether earthwork and foundation construction activities conform to the intent of the contract specifications and plans; and, 4) Provide recommendations for design changes in the event of changed conditions. HARBIGLAN77 REMODEL Job Number 7108 Page 7 March 8, 1998 While on the site during construction, we will not direct or supervise the contractor or work, now. will we be responsible for providing on -site safety or dimensional measurements during construction activities. It has been a pleasure providing you with our professional services. If there are any questions concerning this report, please contact me directly at 425-827-1084. Thank You: DODDS Geosciences Inc. P .••'was ••�� ° NAt. EXPIRES , Mark K. Dodds, .E. MKD/ms DODDS GEOSCIENCES INC. GUIDELINES IN U E OF MS R This report for Job No. 7108 was prepared in accordance with local generally accepted engineering principles and standards. No warranty is expressed or implied. The findings and recommendations contained in this report are based upon the limited services which you requested. Geoteehnical engineering requires the application of professional judgment, as no study can completely quantify subsurface conditions. The owner should seriously consider any recommendations for additional work contained in the report, as it is then our professional opinion that this additional work is necessary to augment and/or fulfill site specific requirement.. This report is an informational document, and is not to be used for contractual Purposes- Any interpretation of subsurface conditions in the report including the test boring logs, and/or text discussions are based upon our testing, analysis, experience, and judgment. There is no warranty that these subsurface interpretations represent subsurface conditions other than that which occurred at the exact locations tested at the time the fieldwork was conducted by this firm. Groundwater levels can be especially sensitive to seasonal changes. This firm is not responsible for interpretations others make using this report. The conclusions and recommendations in this report assume that the field tests that were conducted accurately represent subsurface conditions of the site. If, during construction, significantly different subsurface conditions are encountered from those described in this report, our firm should be notified at once to review these conditions and revise our recommendations as necessary. Also, if there is a significant lapse of time between this report submittal and the start of work at the site, our firm should be allowed to review and verify site conditions. Unanticipated. soil conditions are commonly encountered during excavation and construction, and simply cannot be fully anticipated by periodic soil and/or rock sampling at widely spaced testing locations. The owner should be prepared to accommodate potential extra costs through the development of a contingency fund. This firm cannot be responsible for any deviation from the intent of this report including, but not limited to the nature of the project, the construction timetable, and any construction methods discussed in the report. The recommendations contained in the report are not intended to direct the contractor's methods, techniques, sequences or procedures, except as may be specifically described in the report. This firm will not be responsible for any construction activity on this site, nor are we responsible if others attempt to apply this report to other sites. Job Number 7108 - Plate 1 Guidelines Harb/Glantz Remodel 15910 - 72nd Avenue West Edmonds, Washington DODDS GEOSCIENCES INC. Job Number 7108 - Plate 2 Vicinity Map Harb/Glantz Remodel 15910 - 72nd Avenue West Edmonds, Washington .6/1994 22*21 2068818641 iDDS GEOSCIENCES INC- rPIPE IRON .. , ........ ....,, TV.... II 8.93 NORTH BY ' 8.14 WEST CON WALK SHOP N 89-57'00' E SFR 1., � I I —TE Z 25.00! I ASPHALT DRIVE 1,00 ,OS. GARAGE I � M ♦ w n � �'.Y•$. ��._..% . •' •' Moor a taavY: . PMAPLT 0.�1W.1't •� •' yo ,'` . n 9 IgfM�f pll o n 0.�t yaw O ' � •.� 959E -- �_ .a7' \ 230.29' . N 89'33'00* E-- Job Number 7108 - Plate 3 Site Plan Harb/Glantz Remodel 15910 - 72nd Avenue West Washington Edmonds, ............ PAGE It L6/1994 22:21 2068818641 )1e No. 1 DODDS GEOSCIENCES • PROJECT: 15910 Ave. W. DRILL RIG. Trailer Rig HOLE DIA: 8 in. INITIAL WATER DEPTHH•tttt. FINAL Suriace - BroNn to gray Silty Sand (FIII?l. verY moist, medium -dense. tine Sand and Slit in layer ,yerY Net to >�` 11 Gray Silty very dense. medium -dense to Bottom of Boring I• No standing ndHater [a ding aroau� drilling. Gepectences inc. n0DDs p DRILLED: 2112/97 LOGGED By: Mark K. Dodds P,E. SAMPLER: SP 3 98 MSL HOLE ELEV: 41.5 It DEPTH: up u BLOVIS REMARKS SOIL ORAPHIC /Ft. — TYPE LOG Moisture Content a 13.4% Moisture Content . 28.5% Moisture Content = 33.6% PAGE i OF i 80RING LOG V . / A - L ,, - t. PROJECT:.16910 72nd Ave. W. DATE DRILLED: 2/12/97 Hole No. 2 DRILL RIG:.Trailer Rig LOGGED BY: Mark K. Dodds P.E. HOLE DIA: 8.in. SAMPLER: SPT INITIAL WATER DEPTH: ft. HOLE ELEV: ! 98 MSL FINAL WATER DEPTH: ft. TOTAL DEPTH: 41.5 ft. DESCRIPTION TOPE ORLOG B/Ft. REMARKS U) Surface - Grass. Brown to gray Silty Sandy Fill, wet, Ic ose. SM Dark brown Silty Organic Topsoil_wel, loose. OL SM/ML Gray Silty fine Sand and Silt in layer•:, very wet to saturated, medium -dense to very dense. 0-1- 2- 4 8 8 Moisture Content = 23.0% 8 10 t0 Moisture Content z 31.1% 12 14 18 17 Moisture Content = 27.5% 18 20 33 Moisture Content = 29.8% 22 24 28 54 Moisture Content 26.0% 28 30 51 Moisture Content = 31.4% 32 34 38J 48 Moisture Content 23.2% 38 +100 1 Moisture Content a 31.4% Bottom of Boring 2. No standing groundwater table noted during drliling. DODDS Geosclences Inc. PAGE IOFI BORING LOG V11 LVI ate./ I rr�r� r------- -- 07/ 16/ 1994 22: 21 2068818b4'1 uuuuo OL-i-j : w.LL::l lv(:...J ""' ( 8 9 0 199_ • CITY OF EDMONDS • 250 - 5TH AVE. N. - EDMONDS, WA 98020 - (206) 771-0220 - FAX (206) 771-0221 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT Public Works • Planning • Parks and Recreation . Engineering June 13, 1995 Paula Harb 6919 163rd Place S.W. Edmonds, WA 98026 LAURA M. HALL MAYOR RE: Critical Areas requirements with regards to the violation at 15910 72nd Ave W Dear Ms. Harb: Enclosed you will find the Critical Areas Determination for the above noted property. You will find it quite extensive since there are steep slopes on the property. Please refer to the last paragraph. on the last page of the determination. This statement may apply in your case, therefore, with the submission of your application for a Land Clearing/Tree Cutting Permit, submit a letter requesting that Critical Areas for this project be reviewed with the permit application. Should you have any questions, please contact me at 771-0220. Sincerely, Ann Bullis Code Enforcement Officer • Incorporated August 11, 1890 • Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan t- 690 _1q9 City of Edmonds Critical Areas Checklist RECEIVED MAY 2 6 1995 COMMUNITY SERVICES The Critical Areas Checklist contained on and submit it to the City. The City will this form is to be filled out by any person review the checklist, make a precursory site preparing a Development Permit visit, and make a determination of the Application for the City of Edmonds prior subsequent steps necessary to complete a to his/her submittal of a development development permit application: 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, 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 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 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: Applicant Representative: / 11�, " .. §--a Name Name Street Address 64y, z), , City, State, ZIP/ Phone Signature Date Street Address- - -Ez Anolva4- City, State, ZIP / Phone Signature to a � </z CA WW NO. fritical Areas Checklist Site Information (soils/topography/hydrology/vegetation) 1. Site Address/Location: Z o Na fiLc,, 2e�/170A-1J< 2. Property Tax Account Number: -52q;? 0W f0.3,4 —O6?v�i__S19IF coo=0341-0i0F� 3. Approximate Site Size (acres or square feet): .5'e_e-. S c.✓4- 4. Is this site currently developed? I yes; _L no. If yes; how is site developed? 8tA; %L- o,17e- �90 j/r- 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). X_ Other (please describe): S-� e e /` e 6. Site contains areas of year-round standing water: _ ; Approx. Depth: 7. Site contains areas of seasonal standing water: AID ; Approx. Depth: What season(s) of the year? —� 8. Site is in the floodway floodplain of a water course. 9. Site contains a creek or an area where water flows across the grounds surface? Flows are year- round? Flows are seasonal? (What time of year? ). 10. Site is primarily: forested ; meadow ; shrubs ; mixed urban landscaped (lawn,shrubs etc) 11. Obvious wetland is present on site: �e,v a, .� i V2 C,_ (o� • City of Edmonds Critical Areas Determination Applicant: Barbara Glantz Determination #: CA-95-103 Project Name: Permit Number: Site Location: 15910 72nd Avenue West Property Tax Acct #: 5133-000-032-0209 5133-000-034-0108 Project Description Non -Project Specific Determination: Study Required: During review and inspection of the subject site on June 8, 1995, it was found that the site contains a Steep Slope Hazard Area pursuant to Chapter 20.15B of the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC). Based on these. findings, prior to submission of any development permit, you will be required satisfy the requirements of ECDC 20.15B by completing the following: Steep Slope Hazard Area Delineation Requirements: To determine the extent of the Steep Slope Hazard Area, a topographic survey prepared by a Licensed Land Surveyor delineating Steep Slope Hazard Areas must be completed. Any slope over 40% with more than 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 25 feet from the top or toe or 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 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 The City of Edmonds Side Sewer Drawing NEW CONSTRUCTION ❑ REPAIRS OWNER................................••--•-----.............•-----------. JOB ADDRESS U----.....7v7.4.--A.e........ G.s I.----- a • R i - Z POW-00 (REV.11178) F i EASEMENT NO. ............................... .........•--- LID NO...----•---•-••---.ASMT. NO ................... CONTRACTOR.......................•-----........----.......................................... PERMIT NO. 1 7(.. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT NO ....................................... BLOCK NO. ------- ............................ .................. -------•---.......-•.....................••-•-•---•---••-.----•-•••-•--••--------•-•--.----••......•--...-•-•--... ............................ NAMEOF ADDITION.----------••----....---•------•--•-•..........................•-••---•---•--.................----•................---- iu 5 }o grade, cr Groh swv. t l d .4ki DATE ..l072 I q*-Cj----------•------. By ..... CA FILE NO. Z fritical Areas Checklise Site Information (soils/topography/hydrology/vegetation) .. 1. Site Address/Location: 1451[0 -7ZW ME. 1A) , 2. Property Tax Account Number: 3. Approximate Site Size (acres or square feet): � Z.- 4. Is this site currently developed? jZ"yes; no. 7. If yes; how is site developed? �( 4U l VPM(,�, 2 —C�LV V . 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). 6. 7. 8. 9. 10 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). V Steep: grades of greater than 30 % present on site (a vertical rise of 10-feet over a horizontal distance of less than 33-feet). Other (please describe): tVL& LAJ<i4 �. wn Site contains areas of year-round standing water: n ; Approx. Depth: Site contains areas of seasonal standing water: WD ; Approx. Depth: _ What season(s) of the year? Site is in the floodway In D _ floodplain of a water course. Site contains a creek or an area where water flows across the grounds surface? Flows are year-round? Klo Flows are seasonal? " (What time of year? 14o ). Site is primarily: forested ✓, ; meadow ;shrubs ; mixed urban landscaped (lawn,shrubs etc) _ " 11. Obvious wetland is present on site: h 0 ---------------- ----------_----------------For City Staff Use Only------------------------------------- --------- . 1. Site is Zoned? SCS mapped soil type(s)? 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? 5' ' Site within designated earth subsidence landslide hazard area? ;6. Site designated on the Environmentally Sensitive Areas. Map? ^ca chk.doc; Rev 02/11/97 City of Edmonds RECEIVED O C T 0 9 1997 COMMUNIN SERVICES -MW 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. 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 assist staff in completing their preliminary assessment of the site I have completed the attached Critical Areas Checklist and attest that the answers provided are factual, to the best of my knowledge (fill out the appropriate column below). Owner/Applicant: Name Street Address ummk 15 City State Zip Telephone Signature ✓� _ J Date Applicant Representative: Name ,I f, V'4 <�V' Street Address G /1" A-0"-'41 W 0 Z110 City State Zip �ol1l6[j Date (over) c:raception\jana\cacl.doc City of Edmonds Critical Areas Determination Applicant: Barbara Glantz Determination #: CA-97-201 Paula Harb Project Name: Permit Number: Site Location: 15910 72nd Ave W Property Tax Acct #: 5133-000-034-0108 Project Description Remodel of the existing buildings on site The applicant has requested a conditional waiver from the requirements of completing a Critical. Areas Study for the above referenced project. The applicant has submitted a partial survey of the site which shows the contour lines within 65 feet of the existing buildings. These contour lines indicate that the existing buildings are constructed within existing critical area buffers. ECDC section 20.15B.040.A.2 states "Remodeling, reconstruction or replacement of legal structures and improvements that do not meet the requirements of this chapter but which are in existence on the date the ordinance codified in this chapter becomes effective; provided, that such activity does not increase the potential impact to critical areas or their buffers; or, in the case of an existing structure or improvement in geologically hazardous areas, does not create the potential of soil movement or risk of harm or damage to existing uses or development, or to the public safety." Based on the above referenced code section, the requested critical areas conditional waiver is approved with the following conditions: 1. The applicant must provide the City with a geotechnical report which complies with the requirements of the Building official for the Meadowdale Landslide Hazard Area (ECDC section 19.05) and which states that the proposed addition/remodel will not create the potential of soil movement or risk of harm or damage to existing uses or development, or to the public safety. 2. The proposed addition/remodel may not exceed the location of existing buildings and impervious surfaces. E Johr1sell, Senior Planner Date City of Edmonds Critical Areas Determination Applicant: Barbara Glantz Determination #: CA-97-201 Paula Harb Project Name: Permit Number: Site Location: 15910 72nd Ave W Property Tax Acct #: 5133-000-034-0108 Project Description: non -project specific A site inspection has revealed a site developed with an existing single family dwelling and two accessory structures. The buildings are located on an area which is nearly flat, with very steep topography slopping up from the site to the north and down from the building site to the west and south. The site appears to contains slopes that are greater than 40% with a vertical elevation gain of more than 20 feet. Based on the above findings, it is determined that there is potentially a steep slope critical area on or adjacent to the site. A Critical Areas Study is required to delineate the boundaries of this potential critical areas, the buffers and setbacks. For the steep slopes, a licensed surveyor must create a topographic map of the site which indicates all areas which slope 40% or more and have a vertical gain of 20 feet or more within the 40% slopes. The map must also show the location of the steep slope buffers and setbacks. 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 PIanning 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. �7 John isse 1, Senior Planner Date • CITY OF EDMONDS 121 5TH AVENUE NORTH • EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (425) 771.0220 • FAX (425) 771-0221 BARBARA FAHEY MAYOR COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT Public Works • Planning/Building • Parks and Recreation • Engineering • Wastewater Treatment Plant 10/28/97 Barbara Glantz/Paula Harb 6919 163rd Place S.W. Edmonds, WA 98026 Subject: Determination regarding Critical Areas Checklist #97-201 Dear Applicant: Enclosed please find a copy of the Critical Areas Checklist you submitted. The "DETERMINATION" reached by the City is located on the reverse side of the form (bottom of page). It is very important for you to retain a copy of this Critical Areas Checklist "DETERMINATION" for your records. IMPORTANT INFORMATION TO BE NOTED: PLEASE EXAMINE THIS" DETERMINATION" FOR ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS. YOU MAY NEED TO SUBMIT ADDITIONAL INFORMATION SUCH AS AN ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST OR CRITICAL AREAS STUDY. The `DETERMINATION' for the Critical Areas Checklist you submitted is a site -specific determination not a project -specific determination. You must submit a copy of the CRITICAL AREAS CHECKLIST and DETERMINATION WITH ALL PERMIT APPLICATIONS or YOUR APPLICATION WILL NOT BE PROCESSED. Permit applications include the following: cc: Michael A. George, Architect Note Attachments: * Architectural Design Board Building Permits Conditional Use Permits Subdivisions Variances Applications to the ADB* Land Use Applications Any other development permit applications. Thank you. Diane Cunningham Planning Secretary C: Reception\Jana\CRLTR.doc • Incorporated August 11, 1890 • Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan 0 0 PLANNING DATA NAME: SITE ADDRESS: tv DATE:6y/%g ZONING: �� /' PLAN CHK#: PROJECT DESCRIPTIO CORNER LOT (Yes/No) FLAG LOT N (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 6 (Y/N) LOT COVERAGE: Maximum Allowed: / Actual: pn,✓ ►/-��-/5/;7 BUILDING HEIGHT: Maximum Allowed_: �910 1% Actual Height:' Datum Point: n��1-t� Datum Elevation: - .r A.D.U. CREATED?: UID SUBDIVISION: CRITICAL AREAS#: A i4y. 2 _ / / SEPA DETERMINATION: LOT AREA: ��ICB OTHER: c:V"iles\permi AAp1andnLdoc RETURN ADDRESS: City of Edmonds, City Clerk 121 5th Avenue North Edmonds, WA 98020 STR£EF F/L � 1808101014 08/10/98 16:20 P-0005 Recorded Snohomish County COVENANT OF NOTIFICATION AND INDEMNIFICATION/HOLD HARMLESS Reference #: 97-201 Grantoe(s): (1)Baxbara Rae Glantz (2) Additional on pg. Grantee(s): City of Edmonds Legal Description (abbreviated): Sec S Twn g _4_Qtr� OR Lot 33, 34 Block Plat Dleadowdale Beach Assessor's Tax Parcel ID#(s): (1) 5133-000-034-0108 (2) Supplemental Plat Assessor's Tax Parcel ID# not yet assigned CITY OF EDMONDS APPROVED FOR RECORDING BY: M_ DATE:-fI PAGE / OF S Under the review procedures established .pursuant to the State Building Code, incorporating amendments promulgated by the City of Edmonds, and as a prerequisite to the issuance of a building permit for the construction of a residential structure and attendant facilities, the undersigned OWNERS of property do hereby covenant, stipulate and promise as follows: 0 0 1. Description of Subject Property. APPROVED FOR RECORDING: BY: JZ_ DATE: L %$ PAGE 2_ OF S This covenant of notification and indemnification/hold harmless relates to a tract of land at the street address of 15910 — 72nd Ave. W. (insert street address), Edmonds Snohomish County, Washington and legally described as: The East arse -half of Tracts 33 and 34, 14Badowdale Beach Supplemental Plat, -In o ume b o Plats, Page 42, Records of Snohomish County. 2. Notification and Covenant of Notification. The above referenced site (hereinafter "subject site") lies within an area which has been identified by the.City of Edmonds as having a potential for earth subsidence or landslide hazard. The risks associated with development of the site have been evaluated by technical consultants and engineers engaged by the applicant as a part of the process to obtain a building permit for the subject site. The results of the consultant's reports and evaluations of the risks associated with development are contained in building permit file number (insert number) on file with the City of Edmonds Building Department. Conditions, limitations, or prohibitions on development may have been imposed in accordance with the recommendations of U8101014 APPROVED FOR RECORDIN BY:l _ DATE: 7 Z PAGE -- OF .5 the consultants in the course of permit issuance. The conditions, limitations, or prohibitions may require ongoing maintenance on the part of any owner or lessee or may require modifications to the structures and earth stabilization matters in order to address future or anticipated changes in soil or other site conditions. The statements and conditions proposed by the OWNERS' geotechnical engineer, geologist, architect and/or structural engineer are hereby incorporated by reference from the contents of the file as fully as if herein set forth. Any future purchaser, lessee, lender or any other person acquiring or seeking to acquire an interest in the property is put on notice of the existence of the content of the file and the City urges review of its contents. The file may be reviewed during normal business hours or copies obtained at the Planning Department, City of Edmonds, 5th Avenue North, Edmonds, Washington 98020. 3. Indemnification and Hold Harmless. The undersigned OWNERS hereby waive any and all liability associated with development, stating that they have fully informed themselves of all risks associated with development of the property and do therefore waive and relinquish any and all causes of action against the City of Edmonds, its officers, agents and employees arising from and out of such development. In addition, the OWNERS on behalf of themselves, their successors in interest, heirs and assignees, do hereby promise to indemnify and hold harmless the City of Edmonds, its officers, agents and employees from any loss, claim, liability or damage of any kind or nature to persons or property either on or off the site resulting from or out of earth subsidence or landslide hazard, arising from or out of the issuance of any permit(s) authorizing development of the site, or occurring or APPROVED FOR RECORDING: BY: JM DATE:71-kf9 PAGE 4 OF arising out of any false, misleading, or inaccurate information provided by the OWNERS, their employees, or professional consultants in the course of issuance of the building permit. 4. Insurance Requirement. In addition to any bonding which may be required during the course of development, the Community Services Director "Vs/has not (strike one) specifically required the maintenance of an insurance policy for public liability coverage in the amount and for the time set forth below in order to provide for the financial responsibilities established through the indemnification and hold harmless agreement above: 5. Covenant to Touch and Concern the Land. This covenant of notification and indemnification/hold harmless touches and concerns the subject tract and shall run with the land, binding, obligating and/or inuring to the benefit of future owners, heirs, successors and interests or any other person or entity acquiring an interest in property, as their interest may appear. This provision shall not be interpreted to require a mortgagor or lender to indemnify the City except to the extent of their loss nor to obligate such persons to maintain the insurance above required. s a F PROVED FOR RECORDING: :_7 _ DATE: 2GE OF DONE this 3 day of April. 1998 . OWNER(S) By: BARBARA PM GLANTZ By: 11 By STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss: COUNTY OF SNOHQr S= ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that RARRARA RAF rT A=7 signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be (her) free and voluntary act for the purposes mentioned in this instrument. DATED this ay of April 199 8 . N, CAPF ' N�TAR LIC y AVB G 2 y commission expires: t/ o et C . F` 11.18-98 C t�\P WASI��NG LATEMABUILDINGIMEADOW\COVENANT FT,X,4,#'MaJ_ECT IPP TO: DATE: MEMO TO: PERMIT COORDINATOR, BUILDING DIVISION FROM: PLEASE SIGN FIRE DEPARTMENT DATE ��tj I A ENGINEERING DIVISION DATE ft/t--/tO CO O PLEASE SIGN PLANNING DIVISION DATE PLEASE SIGN PROJECT S SITE ADDRESS .S (C) -7-?,n A Rye Uv PERMIT # ADB# DATE INSPECTED(1 I rQ p DESCRIPTION OF WORK TO BE INSPECTED A field inspection was conducted to determine compliance with approved plans. Final approval denotes that there are no objections from the above signed Department to the granting of approval of the described work Bonds associated with the project may be released / N GRANT FINAL PROJECT APPROVAL 1. 1. 2. 3. GRANT FINAL PROJECT APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS NOTED FAILED FINAL INSPECTION - OUTSTANDING ISSUES RE -INSPECTED OUTSTANDING ISSUES - GRANT FINAL PROJECT APPROVAL ocaprvl.doc.l:temp:bldg:forms6/98 FINAL PROJECT APPROVAL FORM TO: DATE: MEMO TO: PERMIT COORDINATOR, BUILDING DIVISION FROM: FIRE DEPARTMENT DATE — ENGINEERING DIVISION DATE 7! G PLANNING DIVISION DATE ��+ PROJECT. SITE ADDRESS PERMIT # ADB# DATE INSPECTED DESCRIPTION OF WORK TO BE INSPECTED LKA A field inspection was conducted to determine compliance with approved plans. Final approval denotes that there are no objections from the above signed Department to the granting of Final approval of the described work,= Performance Bonds associated with the project may be.released *************************************************************************************** 1. 2. 3. GRANT FINAL PROJECT APPROVAL GRANT FINAL PROJECT APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS NOTED FAILED FINAL INSPECTION - OUTSTANDING ISSUES RE -INSPECTED OUTSTANDING ISSUES - GRANT FINAL PROJECT APPROVAL ocaprvl.doc.l:temp:bldg: forms6/98 • ndmnna QEOSCIENCES INC. Post Office Box 4385 1' Kirkland, WA 98083 Telephone (445) 827-1084 Facsimile (445) 848-9443 4• T Paula Harb Job Number 7108 6919 —163`d Place Southwest July 2, 1998 Edmonds, WA 98026 Subject: Review Response Harb/Glantz Remodel 15910 — 72` d Avenue West Edmonds, Washington Reference: 1) Geo technical Review By Landau Associates, Inc., dated 5/28/98 COP 2) Plan Sheets A2, A10, All, S1, S2 & S3 Dear Ms. Harb: We have reviewed the above referenced items. The following are our responses and clarifications: 1) Footing drains are to be placed uphill of new footings. At this time, we anticipate no work will be required on existing footing drains other than attaching those drains to the storm system. 2) Groundwater seepage into a test boring does not indicate a standing groundwater table, nor does it indicate the need for cutoff trenches or trench drains. In fact, our tests indicate the subsurface is relatively free -draining and we do not anticipate groundwater seepage problems on this project. However there are always unknowns, and that is the primary reason we cautioned the contractor to prepare for groundwater seepage. We do not agree on the advisability of cutoff trench on this project. 3) We have reviewed the slope setback recommendations in our report and it is our opinion that they are adequate. In our judgment, the plans and specifications referenced above conform to the recommendations in the geotechnical report, and the risk of damage to the proposed residence/development or to adjacent properties from soil instability will be minimal, subject to the conditions set forth in the report. The proposed development will not increase the potential for soil movement. Our analysis indicated there is not an unreasonable risk (<30% chance of earth movement affecting the house due to an earthquake within the next 25. years) as defined by Ordinance #2661. Some .of the improvements which will improve stability include collection and drainage of surface and subsurface water to engineered discharge facilities. rd� oKarE ��ie !1/09/1994 11:03 20688186 j DODDS GEOSCIENCES` I HARB/GLANTZ REMODEL RESPONSE July 2, 1998 Please contact the undersigned if there are any questions. Thank you, DODDS Geosciences Inc. Mark K. Dodds, P.E. MKD/ms PAGE 02 Job Number 7108 Page 2 0 LANDAU • A ASSOCIATES, INC. Environmental and Geotechnical Services Ms. Jeannine Graf City of Edmonds Community Services Department 121 Fifth Avenue North Edmonds, Washington 98020 RE: GEOTECHNICAL REVIEW PROPOSED GLANTZ - HARB REMODEL 15910 - 72ND AVENUE WEST EDMONDS, WASHINGTON Dear Ms. Graf: • May 28, 1998 As requested, Landau Associates, Inc. (Landau Associates) has completed a review of the geotechnical-related aspects of construction plans and other documents submitted to.the City of Edmonds (City) as part of the application for a proposed remodel to the single family residence located at 15910 - 72nd Avenue West in Edmonds, Washington. The following documents were provided by the City- for our review: • Geotechitical Engineering Report, Harb/Glantz"Remodel, 15910 - 72nd Avenue West, Edmonds, Washington prepared for the project by Dodds Geosciences; Inc., dated March 8, 1998 • Construction Drawings Sheets C71; A-0 through A-20; S-1 through S-3; D-1 and D-2; M-1 and M-2; and E-1 through E-9, prepared by A.I.A., P.S., and dated April 7, 1998 • Plan Review and Geotechnical Declaration and Statement of Risk, Harb/Glantz Remodel, .15910 - 72nd Avenue West, Edmonds, Washington, submitted by Dodds Geosciences, Inc., dated March 26, 1998 • Harb/Glantz, Remodel - Storm Drainage, .15910.72nd Ave: W., prepared by Michael. A. George, . AIA and dated March 16, 1998 • An undated City of Edmonds Environmental Checklist for the proposed residence. , . WAPATO CREEK PLACE - 4210 - 20TH STREET E. SUITE F • TACOMA, WA 98424-1823 (253) 926-2493 Fax: (253) 926-2531 E-Mail: info@Landauinc.com Edmonds Spokane Tacoma GENERAL We understand that the subject property is located at the north end of 72nd Avenue West, north of North Meadowdale Road. The property is within the mapped Meadowdale Landslide Area (Roger Lowe Associates 1979); therefore, our review is in accordance with the requirements of City Ordinance 2661, Earth Subsidence and Landslide Hazard Areas. Based on review of the.site Topographic Survey, Sheet A-1, and our past experience in the area, the. subject site is bounded on the south by an existingsingle family residence; areas to the north, east, and west are currently undeveloped. The developed portion of the property slopes downward to the west at about 20 to 25 percent, steepening to about 60 to 70 percent approximately 60 ft west of the existing residence. To the north of the existing residence, the.property.slopes upward at about a 65 to 70 percent slope. The property to the east also slopes upward at about a 60 to 70 percent slope. Near -surface soil and groundwater conditions reported in borings B-1 and B-2, completed by Dodds Geosciences.Inc. (Dodds Geosciences) in February 1997, indicate that the site soil consists of a sequence of about 6 to 7 ft of loose to medium dense silty sand (interpreted by Dodds Geosciences as fill) overlying very dense, silty fine sand with lenses of hard, sandy silt, which is mapped as part of the Whidbey Formation (Roger Lowe Associates 1979). Groundwater presence is not reported,by Dodds Geosciences, though moisture content data of soil samples recovered from the borings indicate that soil below a depth of about 5 ft is .generally wet. The report does . not indicate if piezometers were installed in the. borings for subsequent groundwater monitoring. Review of geologic maps of the area (Roger Lowe Associates 1979) indicate that the site is situated at the contact with the glacial advance. outwash deposits and underlying Whidbey Formation. . GEOTECHNICAL REPORT. Landau Associates generally agrees .with the conclusions and recommendations contained in Dodds Geosciences' March 8, 1998 geotechnical report prepared for the project, with the exception of the following specific comments: • Temporary excavation slopes of 1 HI V in the fill maybe prone to sloughing and raveling, .which could result in undermining of existing slabs/foundations. This is especially true at transitions with pre-existing, footings, since the footing depth recommended by Dodds Geosciences may be deeper than -the existing footings [Note: existing footing depths are not noted on the documents submitted for our review]. While this is, primarily a constructability issue; it also has a bearing on. the amount of excavation which will be required, and how footing, drains will be installed. The project geotechnical engineer, Dodds Geosciences; has covered the subject of temporary slopes reasonably well; however, it is our opinion that the architect should note on the project plans the need for maintaining safe side slopes at these transition points, and require that the contractor properly install footing drains per the recommendations in the geotechnical report. . 2 LANDAu Assoc1ATES • Dodds Geosciences recommends placing footing drains on the uphill side of footings. It is not clear if this, applies to pre-existing. footings as well as new. Also, the drainage plan does not show. how footing drains will be.placed around the dwelling, and the project plans do not show footing-. drain typical sections. We recommend the City require: 1) clarification whether the footing drain recommendation applies to pre-existing footings as well as new footings, 2) project plans which show typical footing drain details, and 3) fa drainage plan which shows both the footing drain layout, as well as the discharge point(s) for the footing drains. • According to the soil types described on the summary boring logs, and in the Dodds'Geosciences report text, near -surface site stratigraphy consists of relatively pervious sandy soil (glacial advance outwash fill) overlying relatively impervious fine-grained soil (Whidbey Formation). On page-:2 of the Dodds Geosciences geotechnical report it is noted that no groundwater table was present during drilling; however, on "page 5 the presence of groundwater seepage is cited. Site filling history, the "wet" soil noted on the boring logs and the mention of groundwater seepage in the geotechnical report; local topography, and nearby surface water features -all, suggest past and/or current wet site conditions. The geotechnical report recognizes this situation.and cautions the contractor about encountering moderate to heavy seepage, even in shallow excavations. In our opinion, it may be desirable to install a cut-off drain upslope of the existing residence to intercept"(potential) perched groundwater,at the contact of the glacial advance outwash sand fill and Whidbey Formation. A cut-off drain would reduce the potential for encountering groundwater mexcavations; and enhance the overall stability of the site. If Dodds Geosciences agrees that such a drain is needed, the project plans should be modified to show this improvement. [Note: It is possible that such a drain already exists, and isthe reason that groundwater was not encountered in the borings. If this, is the case, the presence of the'drain should -be identified.] In the event Dodds Geosciences believes that such a drain would not be of value, either from a construction perspective or improvement to site stability, we suggest the City require a response'from Dodds Geosciences which explains report inconsistencies with respect to this.issue. The report states that a 10-ft setback from the northern slope should be safe, and that -the setback . could be reduced for small, isolated areas. Based on the site topographic map, (Sheet A-1), the. existing slope to the north. and east of the existing residence has a gradient of about 65 to.70 percent. Geologic mapping indicates that the slope is underlain by glacial" advance outwash with glacial till near the top of the. slope (Roger Lowe Associates.1979). Upslope conditions, such as: 1) any -indications of past instability, 2) whether fill been placed on the slope by upslope property. owners, 3) whether storm water from.upslope properties has been properly disposed of (e.g., not . directed over the slope in an uncontrolled manner), etc:, are not described in the geotechnical report. The proposed construction includes a lower floor bedroom with french doors. at the point closest to the slope. . Even if existing.upslope. conditions arefavorable for a 10-4 setback, steepslopes of this type can. experience periodic debris flows, which are landslides characterized by small, shallow, surficial failures of loosened soil (colluvium) on the face of the slope during extreme precipitation events. Debris flows consist of a chaotic mixture of soil, water and vegetation and can attain sufficient - forces to severely,damage a structure and threaten the lives of�occupants. 3 LANDAU ASSOCIATES In our opinion, Dodds Engineers should reevaluate the setback issue in the context of existing slope conditions, potential future debris flows, and the placement of'a bedroom with french doors at its proposed location. Consideration should be given to changing the floor plan, reinforcing perimeter walls, construction of a deflection wall outside of the french:doors, etc. The City should request.a response regarding this issue. CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS The following presents Landau Associates' review comments on the Construction Drawings Sheets C-1; A-0 through A-20; S-1 through S-3; D-1 and D-21 M-1 and M-2; and E-1 through E-9 prepared by A.I.A., P.S., and dated April 7, 1998.. • Sheet S-1, Structural Notes. We recommend adding that prepared foundation bearing surfaces be approved by the geotechnical engineer. The geotechnical report recommends a footing drain on all uphill sides of the foundations. No footing drains.ai-e shown on the details on Sheet S-2. We recommend that footing drains be added to the drawing, where required. CLOSURE We recommend the City require that the applicant address the. comments in this letter and submit to the City revised construction drawings, if appropriate, and any required supplemental information, prior to issuing the building permit.. Within the limitations of scope; schedule, and budget, our geotechnical review of documents submitted to the City of Edmonds for the proposed Glantz-Harb single family residence was completed in accordance with generally accepted professional engineering principles and practices in this area at the time this letter was prepared. We make no otherwarranty either express or implied. REFERENCES Roger Lowe Associates..1979. Final Report, Landslide Hazards Investigation, Meadowdale Area, Edmonds,. Washington for the City of Edmonds. RLAL Project No. 294-02. October 16. 4 LANDAU ASSOCIATES Please direct any questions concerning this letter to one of the undersigned at (206) 622-4113"or (253) 926-2493. Thank you for the opportunity to be of service to the City of Edmonds on this project. LANDAU ASSOCIATES, INC. 4' pF S By. p� 27 805 Edward J. Heavey, P.E. SIaNAt.^ Senior Engineer EXPIRES O �09 - GZ.> and William D. Evans, CPG Associate WDE/EJH/djs No. 074075.10 05/28/98 LTR0►ECrM41075.10\SFR159I0.RVW r =ya Construction Type: v- N '>u 14:& r, Stories: Z O� ► 0f:::0FVn lAm D�j D/J SST— ARCHITECT DECLARATION I have reviewed the geotechnical engineering study and supplementary recommendations prepared by DODDS Geosciences Inc., P. O. Box 6966, Bellevue, WA 98008, Job Number -7106, dated 3-6-15, and understand the design recommendations elucidated therein. I have discussed with the owners the potential risk of loss due to slides or other unpredictable geological activity involved with development of this project for this site. To the best of my knowledge, the recommendations presented in the aforementioned reports have been heeded and established measures have been taken to`reduce the potential risk of injury and property damaggfrom any earth movement predicted within the report. VICINITY MAP M-2 E- I E-2 E-3 E-4 E-5 E-6 UPPER FLOOR ELECTRICAL PLAN { EXISTING FOUNDATION PLAN EXISTING MAIN FLOOR PLAN EXISTING UPPER FLOOR PLAN EXISTING ROOF PLAN EXISTING EAST, SOUTH ELEVATIONS EXISTING WEST, NORTH ELEVATIONS E_7 EXISTING GARAGE FOUNDATION, FLOOR PLANSI E-S L EXISTING GARAGE SOUTH, WEST ELEVATIONS E-9 EXISTING GARAGE NORTH, EAST ELEVATIONS EXCLUSION OF SERVICES Construction drawings are diagrammatic and do not intend totshow all details or conditions of constntctan. The Architect normally provides clarifications and answers questions raised by the Contractor and others during Construction Phase Services: The Architect therefore assumes no liability or responsibility for errors or conflicts which occur because of his exclusion from full participation in Construction Phase Services. Revisions 1. Project No. Date Drawn Check LCITY Cipy LIABILTY AND LANDSLIDE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT RE: OWNER.- BARBARA GLANTZ ADDRESS: 15910 - 72"d Ave. W. Edmonds, WA 98026 FILE NO. V-97-147 The above -named Owner of the above property hereby states as follows: . ,: .,,..... ,.� The permit submittal information is accurate, and I hereby release and indemnify the City of Edmonds (" City' and its staff from any liability associated with reliance on my permit application submittals; while my application may reference the reports of prior public consultants to the City, all conclusions shall be those of myself and my design professionals; I understand and accept the risk of developing in an area with potential unstable soils and I will advise, in writing, any prospective purchaser of the site, or any prospective lessees of structures on the site, of the slide potential of the area. DATE: March Z 'J , 1998. BARBARA GLANTZ STATE OF WASHINGTON ss. COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH On this day personally appeared before me BARBARA GLANTZ, to me known to be individual described in and who executed the within and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged to me that she signed the same as her free and voluntary act and deed for the uses and purposes therein mentioned. SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me by BARBARA GLANTZ on this 2 a day of March, 1998. o1i-vr olelfi6 CARet ): .�\SSION NOTAgy . NA pU6l1G �� QF WASN�N� iOT NAME: J .ARY PUBLIC in and for the State of Washingt9n. My commission expires: I I 13 I9 9 AiCU9M1%216908.V01(/tm8011) I 0 OEOSCIENCES INC. Post Office Box -0385 Kirkland, WA 98083 Telephone (425) 827-1084 Facsimile (425) 828-9443 Paula Harb 6919 —163'd Place Southwest Edmonds, WA 98026 Attention: Mike George, Architect Subject: Geotechnical Engineering Reconnaissance Harb Remodel 15910 — 72°d Avenue West Edmonds, Washington Dear Ms. Harb: Job Number 7108 December 29, 1997 The undersigned registered professional engineer conducted a reconnaissance of your property at 15910 — 72'd Avenue West in Edmonds, Washington. The purpose of our work was to assess the impact of the proposed deck which was proposed within ten feet of the base of the slope. The scope of our work consisted of our site visit where we observed surficial features. No subsurface testing was conducted for this letter. No warranty is expressed or implied. In our opinion, the proposed deck construction will not create the potential of soil movement or risk of harm or damage to the existing uses or development, or to the public safety. Please contact the undersigned directly if there are any questions'. Thank You: DODDS Geosciences Inc. • •Wit, ��u_ _ ��r �1 HARB/GLANTZ REMODEL March 8, 1998 Conclusions and Recommendations General: Job Number 7108 Page 3 The following general geotechnical conclusions can be drawn from our field and laboratory test data: 1) The existing fills are not capable of providing foundation support to the proposed structures. Excavation to the medium -dense to very dense silty fine sands below the fills is required. 2) Conventional footings bearing on medium -dense silty sand can be designed for a bearing pressure of 2000 pounds per square foot (psf). 3) The site is sensitive to moisture. We recommend footing drains around all uphill sides of footings at the elevation of the footings. Positive drainage to an appropriate drainage structure is recommended. 4) Slabs -on -grade, if they are being considered, should be underlain with at least six inches of free -draining sand. In addition, a visquine barrier is recommended. 5) Soils with a high percentage of silt and/or clay (>15%) are moisture sensitive and difficult to impossible to utilize as structural fill is the soil is more than two to three percent wetter or drier than the optimum moisture content at the time of compaction. The soils at this site do have considerable silt, and are moisture sensitive. 6) Temporary excavation slopes should not exceed 1:1 (Horizontal: Vertical). Flatter slopes may be required depending on site conditions. If steeper slopes through the fill soils are required, shoring may be necessary. 7) It is our understand that existing and new impervious surface storm drainage will be connected to existing tight lines that connect to the City of Edmonds storm drainage system. This is acceptable. 8 Provided the recommendations of this report are applied in design and construction, it is our opinion the addition/remodel will not create the potential of soil movement or risk of harm or damage to existing uses or y,ta ` development, or to public safety. te4W�t -9) A safe setback distance for the western downslope is twenty-five (25) feet. A safe setback for the northern upslope is generally ten (10) feet, although this distance could possibly be reduced for small isolated cases, if required. 10) No additional fill should be placed on the site without our approval. In general, no fill should be placed between the structure and the downslope to the south or west. STREE*DDRESS FILE CITY OF EDMONDS 7110-210TH ST.S.W. • EDMONDS, WA 98026 • (206) 771-0235 • FAX (206) 744-6057 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT - PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION FSt. 1890 July 9, 1996 Barbara Glantz P.O. Box 330 Lynnwood, WA 98046 /5V/O Subject: 1,,RW - 72nd Ave. W. - #303750 Dear Mrs. Glantz: BARBARA FAHEY MAYOR I have reviewed your account and will allow a credit for the month of May billing in accordance with our City policy. The policy states that the customer will be billed at the retail rate based upon the average water consumption for the same period during the previous year. In addition, the excess water lost from the leak will be billed to customer at the City's wholesale rate with a 15% surcharge added for administrative cost. Only one leak credit will be granted in any three year period. Should you have any additional questions after you receive your new billing, please contact Ilene Larson, Utility Billing Clerk, at 771-0241. Sincerely, Ron Holland Water/Sewer Supervisor RH/lk cc: Ilene Larson Utility Billing Clerk wordata4aterkredit96\4303750 • Incorporated August 11, 1890 • Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan JAL PA XC) z, �� jjI JUL U 3 PUBLIC WOW DEPI CITY OF EDMONDS 250 - 5TH AVE. N. • EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (206) 771-3202 COMMUNITY SERVICES: I o Public Works • Planning • Parks and Recreation • Engineering 890 .19Ci April 8, 1991 Mrs. Paul Glantz 15910 72nd Ave. Edmonds, WA 98020 Re: Drainage Ms. Johanson LARRY S UGHTEN MAYOR PETER E. HAHN DIRECTOR On or about February 6, of this year, I received a complaint of a small landslide north of 7309 North Meadowdale Road. I hired Landau Associates to investigate the report. Mr. Bill Evans of Landau and Mr. Jim Walker of the City of Edmonds Engineering Department conducted an investigation of the site on February 7, 1991. I have enclosed their findings in this letter. As a result of the investigation, two drains originating from your property were identified as contributing to the slide. Mr. Evans recommended these drains should not be allowed to continue to drain over the slope. Mr. Evans and Mr. Walker suggest your drains could be connected to the existing drainage system to the south of your property. I request you take action to route your drains to an approved discharge point, thus reducing the potential of your drain contributing to a slide on the adjacent property. If you have any questions, feel free to call me at 771-3202. 1rn-�:erely, Richard R. Mumma O Building Official City of Edmonds cc: Jim Walker Bill Evans, Landau Associates slide.rrm • Incorporated August 11, 1890 0 cc �e Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan '68TREEET FILE 0 CITY OF EDMONDS 250 - 5TH AVE. N. • EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (206) 771-3202 COMMUNITY SERVICES: Public Works • Planning • Parks and Recreation • Engineering ,890-199 April 8, 1991 Mrs. Paul Glantz 15910 72nd Ave. Edmonds, WA 98020 Re: Drainage Ms. Johanson LARRY S. NAUGHTEN MAYOR PETER E. HAHN DIRECTOR On or about February 6, of this year, I received a complaint of a small landslide north of 7309 North Meadowdale Road. I hired Landau Associates to investigate the report. Mr: Bill Evans of Landau and Mr. Jim Walker of the City of Edmonds Engineering Department conducted an investigation of the site on February 7, 1991. I have enclosed their findings in this letter. As a result of the investigation, two drains originating from your property were identified as contributing to the slide. Mr. Evans recommended these drains should not be allowed to continue to drain over the slope. Mr. Evans and Mr. Walker suggest your drains could be connected to the existing drainage system to the south of your property. I request you take action to route your drains to an approved discharge point, thus reducing the potential of your drain contributing to a slide on the adjacent property. If you have any questions, feel free to call me at 771-3202. &i'n�erely, Richard R. Mumma O Building Official, City of Edmonds cc: Jim Walker Bill Evans, Landau Associates s1ide.rrm S/0, d'rq-)17,5 connected '7 2 n of A Ve 9- �% • Incorporated August 11, 1890 • Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan A. LANDAU A ASSOCIATES, INC. Geoenvironmental Engineering and Technologies February 15, 1991 City .of Edmonds 250 Fifth Avenue North Edmonds, Washington 98020 Attention: Mr. James C. Walker, P.E. RE: GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTATION LANDSLIDE NORTH OF 7309 NORTH MEADOWDALE BEACH ROAD MEADOWDALE AREA EDMONDS, WASHINGTON Dear Mr. Walker: During the morning of Thursday, February 7, 1991, you and the writer made a visual reconnaissance of a small landslide north of the residence located at 7309 North Meadowdale Road. This letter summarizes observations made during that reconnaissance and provides our preliminary conclusions and recommendations. Site Conditions: • The landslide reportedly occurred on Sunday, February 3, 1991. • The landslide involved an estimated 50 to 100 cubic yards of soil. The slide was of the "debris flow" variety and involved movement of primarily colluvium and previously disturbed materials. • The primary soil type exposed at the headscarp of the landslide is silt and clay (part of the Whidbey formation). Some silty sand is also present near the upper part of the headscarp. • There is a small drainage which flows north of and through the landslide debris. There was very little water flow within this drainage feature on the day of the reconnaissance. However, the configuration of the drainage course and lack of vegetation suggest that flow increases substantially during storm events. • The headscarp of the landslide contains several small wet zones. However, no active seeps or springs were observed on the day of the reconnaissance. • Drainage from the residence located at 15920 72nd Avenue appears to discharge to the south, away from the landslide. • There are two drains from the residence located at 15910 72nd Avenue which discharge to or over the slope in close proximity to the landslide. One of these drains is a 3-4 inch rigid perforated PVC pipe which discharges into a land- scaped area immediately. west of the house; the second drain is a perforated 4-inch flexible pipe which exits the bank near the southwest corner of the lot and which drapes down across the western slope in a northwesterly direction. P.O. BOX 1029 • EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 98020-9129 • (206) 778-0907 - FAX (206) 778-6409 0 0 CONCLUSIONS • The landslide occurred within an area that has had similar historic debris flow type of landslides (verbal communication, Mr. Mark Thometz - 7309 North Meadowdale Road). • The landslide caused minimal property damage and no personal injury. • The brief visual reconnaissance did not allow sufficient investigation to determine the exact cause of the landslide. However, it is our opinion that this landslide, and previous landslides within this immediate area, are principally of natural origin. The drains cited above could contribute to or act as a triggering mechanism; however, future landsliding should be anticipated even if these drains are rerouted. RECOMMENDATIONS • There are a number of commonly accepted remedial measures which can be taken following such a landslide. These include: 1) cleaning up debris, 2) controlling drainage, 3) reseeding with grass and native vegetation, 4) covering exposed areas with plastic, and 5) minor slope regrading. None of these should be considered permanent remedies. • The previously cited two drains at 15910 72nd Avenue should not be allowed to continue to discharge over the slope. These drains should be intercepted and routed to an approved discharge point. If any other drains of this nature are encountered, they should be treated in a similar fashion. • The occurrence of this slide and other historic landslides within the immediate area should be considered during the evaluation of any future building permit applications. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service on this project. Please call if you have questions. WDE/ee No. 74-26.10 02/15/91 ®M0ND6\®MD7309.LEr 2 Very truly yours, LANDAU ASSOCIATES, INC. William D. Evans, CPG Senior Geologist LANDAU ASSOCIATES, INC. - •• • • `.. =-sue • • CITY OF EDMONDS LAURA M. HALL ;,.;a,.A• MAYOR 250 - 5TH AVE. N. • EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (206) 771-0220 FAX (206) 771-0221 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT 8g0.19 C p Public Works • Planning . Parks and Recreation . Engineering STREET FILE May 17, 1995 Barbara Rae Glantz P.O.Box 330 Lynnwood, WA 98046 RE: Tree Removal at es"t Code Enforcement File #ZE9526 Dear Ms. Glantz: This letter is to inform you that we have received a formal complaint that trees have been removed on your property without first obtaining the proper permits and approvals. A tree cutting permit is required including compliance with the Critical Areas Ordinance, State Environmental Policy Act, and Earth Subsidence Ordinance. According to City records, no Conditional Use Permit was obtained approving the removal of the trees on either property which is in violation of Section 18.45.020, Chapter 19.05 and Chapter 20.15E of the Edmonds Community Development Code. According to City maps and results of a site inspection, both properties are located within the Meadowdale Landslide Hazard Area and located within a Critical Area and/or buffer. To correct this violation, the following action must be taken: l . Submit a complete Critical Area Checklist. Staff will conduct a site visit and mail you a formal determination. The determination may require that further information must be submitted to determine the extent of the Critical Area and recommendations for its protection, such as a geotechnical study and topography prepared by a licensed land surveyor. 2. Submit a complete application for a Conditional Use Permit including all items listed in the enclosed Land Clearing/Tree Cutting handout. 3. If the permit is approved, comply with all provisions and conditions as specified in the Conditional Use Permit. 4. If the permit is denied, comply with enforcement procedures imposed at time of denial. Within 10 days from the date of this letter, please begin the corrective action stated above by submitting a Critical Areas Checklist for review, and a reasonable date stated in writing by which the application for Conditional Use Permit will be submitted. No action will ultimately lead to monetary fines until compliance is obtained. Since the violation is located in the designated Meadowdale Landslide Hazard Area it is your responsibility to obtain a geotechnical report prepared by a licensed geotechnical engineer that includes recommendations for short and long term slope protection and landslide hazard mitigation. Typically this type of a report is submitted after the determination for Critical Areas is made, however, if the geotechnical engineer believes that the stability of the slope poses an immediate danger, it is your responsibility to follow his/her recommendations immediately. Any prepared report shall be submitted to the City. • Incorporated August 11, 1890 • Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan Enclosed you will find a Critical Area Checklist, Land Clearing/Tree Cutting handout, application form, Environmental Checklist (SEPA), and adjacent property owner list preparation instructions Your cooperation in resolving this matter is appreciated. Should you have questions, please contact me at 771-0220. Sincerely, li"- Ann Bullis Code Enforcement Officer cc: Building Official File F"r`a EyD ONDS PUBLIC' WORKS - EMIbffi2ING ACTION REPORT 1805 SUSPENSE DATE: / b Date:I Time: File N Attachments: CJYes REQUESTOR: NAME: (_ %j. GC C(C.� ./7t ADDRESS: ��( I o PHONE: REQUEST RECEIVED BY: TELEPHONE CI CONTACT IN OFFICE r---j OTHER: G7 RECEIVED BY: All Concerned Notified Q Action Completed/File 3 2( City of Edmonds RIGHT-OF-WAY CONSTRUCTION PERMIT* r A. Address or Vicinity of Coi B. Type of Work (be specific Permit No• 2CCO-0 22-6--159 Issue Date: 'I -AO -2,000 1 • � G �a�-T% n� ( C. )Contractor: Contact: Mailing Address: 0 0 Phone: State License #:(7l.T } Liability Insurance: Bond: $ D. Building Permit # (if applicable):- 3 3 _ Side Sewer Permit # (if applicable): O ' E. ❑ Commercial ❑ Subdivision ❑ City Project ❑ EUC (PUD, GTE, PSE, CHAMBERS, OVWD) ❑ Multi -Family ❑ Single Family ❑ Other INSPECTOR- F. PAVEMENT: ❑ YES ❑ NO G. SIZE OF CUT X H. Charge: $ CONCRETE CUT: ❑ YES ❑ NO "APPLICANT TO READ AND SIGN ,�IDEMNITY: 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 ';dny, 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. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR WORKMANSHIP AND MATERIALS FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR FOLLOWING THE FINAL INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE WORKK, 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. It Traffic control and public safety shall be in accordance with City regulations as` required by the City Engineer. Every flagger must .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. I HAVEREAD THE ABOVE STATEMENTS AND UNDERSTAND TH�'PE IT REQUIREMENTS AND ACKNOWLEDGE THAT I MUST M KE THE PINK COPY OF THE PERMIT AVAILABL ON SITE AT ALL TIMES FOR INSPECTIONS iM�L' r r ® V' Signature: _ �" "" Date: 4 y. ( traijor or Agent) 'p c Ile - CALL DIAL -A -DIG (1-800-424-5555) PRIOR TO BEGINNING WORK FOR CITS Approved by Time Authorized: void' Afters / ' ,Q / Q / Special Conditions: V USE ONLY Right -of --way Feed epc''�� Disruption.. Fee/Fund 111: Restoration Fee: Total Fee: Receipt No: i Issued by: t .,t UPON COMPLETION OF PERMITTED WORK, AN ENGINEERING FINAL INSPECTION IS REQUIRED PER CHAPTER 18.00 OF THE EDMONDS . COM, UNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE. FINAL APPROVAL OF PERMITTED WORK: rwa 16gn nW ' ?' INSPE TOR'S SIGNATURE DATE: , For inspection requirements see Engineering Information Handout. zow- Am USE PERMIT CITY OF EDMONDS ZONE O NUMBER CONSTRUCTION PERMIT APPLICATION JOB f SUITE/APTq OWNER NAME/NAME O�FB SINE.-S}S ADDRESS 1(5n,1!"'`�1LEGAL DESCRIPTION CHEC�KJSUBDIVIS10N NO. LlONO. w MAILING ADDRESS 1// Yi t t t� A 10 O i'-{ �% J +c- A )am" PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY PER OFFICIAL STREET MAP. TESCP Approvedj�l J9 CITY , ZIP TELEPHONE NUMBER y/} _ RW Permit Required�/V�/ ❑ (//� _ EXISTING 0 REQUIRED DEDICATION ^� Street Use Permit Req'y&/J ❑ J Inspection RequiredY ❑'.. • W PROPOSED 4 Sidewalk Required ❑ " NAMEF METER SIZE LINE SIZE NO. !�TES, PRV REQUIRED NO ❑w ADDRESS O "'i1 ,�.. REMARKS�fn17!/✓;•'ice) !/.l � k: U 1, �� .-J GU ti'T72 G 4 %�Fr� / � ¢ V w a CITY ) t U „ZIP TELEPHONE NUMBER { �'/l�fa ,. 7vf/1ft/ �L: '/1%G �Al.S!r) '" E' &1 /7 Z Y `a i`�� f n 136) i5b� 1 �� i 7•5'G',d:�. ,,-1 S'l.5 %c "/ 4 c, v f �, ..u.. /J`,✓ !� NAM �...t1C.I I%F-�' L•`/-1 ;/ �C:. t ("U •V f'� eL ®/1Jir� L T7eftlL .'.�lT+ 4e57r4 t LEI Iv['c>1 Aig UAD �i� ENGIN%�ERING MEMO DATED REVIEWED BY ram// iJ� ZIP TELEPHONE NUMBER 4- 2`3ryi7 � �' CIJT�` ,�J '7 N+ y� FIRE MEMO DATED REVIEWED BY O ST TE LICENSE NUMBER PIR ION DATE LL 1JEI 0 VARI NCE OR CU ADB q SHORELINE q Legal Description of Propert - include all easements i W q7" �+—R -EPA REVI W SIGN AREA . HEIGHT Z ?_ COMPtETTE EXEMPT ALLOWED I PROPOSED ALLOWED PROPOSED L) ` `-' LOT COVERAGE REQUIRED SETBACKS (FT.) PROPOSED SETBACKS ((FT.) w ALLOWED PROPOSED FRONT SIDE REAR FRONT UR SIDE REAR 51 1 a" Property. ALU ' LOT ARE/A. f G REVIEW BTax Parcel No.nt �13_ 0 to's KEMAPIKS7 04 NEW E9 RESIDENTIAL PLUMBINGIMECH j Jq J I� ADDITION COMMERCIAL M CHANGE OF USE V. - i ® REMODEL APT. BLDG. SIGN GRADING FENCE " CHECKED BY� TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION CODE OCCUPANT IR REPAIR CYDS. a I X FT) .r `./'1t%+��„0 DEMOLISH a INSERT HOT TUB/SPA El TOVE •D TREQUIRED INSPECTOR A EA , �9.r.L/_ LOAD POOL SPECIAL PANT GARAGE RETAINING WALL/ ❑ YES CARPORT ROCKERY RENEWAL REMARKS a(TYPE OF USE, BUSINESS OWTIVITY.)•EXPLAIN: PROGRESS INSPECTIONS PER UBC 1 O8 r ,�1 vit odds Z2sD0 y NUMBER NUMBER OF CRITICAL o OF DWELLING Q AREAS J m STORIES UNITS 491 � PL.. NUMBER ///{�O �f,,,/ h/ DESCRIBE! WORK TO BE DONE ( T'TACH PL T PAN) ` /-,lev '" et/ F, '06✓��-1`4 FINAL INSPECTION REOUIRED PLAN CHECK FEE VALUATION FEE e �a -1i S, F ` iat'�p,Vi,Ov'. •je. BUILDING ifi r ci i 1 a� FAT SOURCE: t �7 Ir KA 10 GLAZING % PLUMBING Plan Check No. MECHANICAL GRADINGIFILL This Permit covers work to be done on private property ONLY. Any construction on the public domain (curbs, sidewalks, driveways, marquees, etc.) will require separate permission. STATE SURCHARGE Permit Application- 180 Days Permit Limit:1 Year - Provided Work Is Started Within 180 Days STORM DRAINAGE FEE ENG. INSPECTION FEE ✓ ;r "Applicant, on behalf of his or her spouse, heirs, assigns and successors in interest, agrees to indemnify, defend and hold 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 I modify, waive or reduce any requirement of any city ordinance nor limit in any way the City's ability to enforce any ordinance provision." N' th t th I A ,*hC91 end,4L_ q y ; Ci+�.!'1lL1±�''%`�i'� 711 . �4' �• PLAN CHECK DEPOSIT,. 00 i j O AL AMOUNT DUE ,s �I4�Ib� 4 .� �f'" ,. I hereby acknowledge that ave rea t s app Ica on, a e informationgiven is correct; and that I am the owner, or the duly ATTENTION APPLICATION APPROVAL authorized agent of the owner. I agree to comply with city and THIS PERMIT This application is not a permit until state laws regulating construction; and in doing the work authoriz• AUTHORIZES signed by the Building Official or his/her ed thereby, no person will be employed in violation of the Labor ONLY THE WORK NOTED Deputy; and fees are paid, and. receipt is Code of the State of Washington relating to Workmen's Compensa• acknowledged in space provided. Lion Insurance aria RCW 18.27. INSPECTION SIG ,yA-TU.E IOW ER OR AGENT) DATE SIGNED �° DEPARTMENT CITY OF SIGNATURE D TE —; EDMONDS% JOFFAL'S .2 CALL FOR RELEA ED. a DATE ATTENTION ' INSPECTION J_ IT IS UNLAWFUL TO USE OR OCCUPY A BUILDING OR STRUCTURE UNTIL A FINAL INSPECTION HAS BEEN MADE AND APPROVAL OR 771 _Owwo L1 ORIGINAL — File YELLOW — Inspector A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY HAS BEEN GRANTED. UBC / SECTION 109 r �Y PINK — Owner GOLD — Assessor 10247 (4 � cd 25.00' J 32 ' i 06 .................. 1,30 _ _STREET �\�' Cj • 539,.s . f: 25:Q5' FiLt q ......... 12p 0.59 arcs' ' \ -.. ..... ........ .... ' t m FOUND CRIMPED _ ..... ►� N IRON PIPE, O o • 8.93 NORTH BY _ �•._ � � - ... • •..� - . .. '. •. ''. \ �`-.��• --. 8.14 WEST TOE SLOPE .... .,. \ \ sc _CON WALK ENCIsTINIo Q SHOP N 89*57'00" E a LLJ Q ACD .i. OVE O IO --- --_ ,. 000 AP P OX. LOCATION DECK:. a —TE OF OWER LINE. ut .c lc�V2a,,� ;ex+ter. 1 - i FIE D .VERIFY . ti I/' Z z - •• ", I � ;'�!' ! :i ,. �i ,�a � NI�v-_.r_NGLos�b F� � ` _ _ Z'!. ; I F��. ;'a GaiJNCGT�O}J w Q : `? �, I� I�'i l" �' r l ; To austv... 25.0 a NS\v r;' t.;; : ASPHALT DRIVE ASP V�D PL WNG r -- ( - ;� !J il�s�f ti�w lytzo 105.28 \ o coN �. 33'� sxts-� cNt�tsi�i�� t�EI�H n n n ^ �' �� ;�__,� �► GARAGE EP Cl�zabE: �.1GrG - ROOF EL.= 108.95't C O I PARAPET EL.=109.1't - NDR*4 ^ 9.9 - Fc oolz ECEi/ `� 26.644.39 sq.ft. co 0.61 or-resto to I GARAGE s _ 9 COORR[-To1.1 t :r� BSBfL_ 47 - 6.67' '"' A. FOUND CRI D ' IRON PIPE 230.29' R�TouGt. N 89'53'00" E (HELD AS E. COR i 105.28 LOT 33) t.tv��cs• 10.00' 90 94.... Ej 4" CONC. 6.. • 1� 5W a' �(N PL $N MfPt 14 3 S 'i}` i J,k a 50711' 5zDQ • . 14T7 347 �I sw PL Ch"P'�r"✓' : r. h '� -- 15 D--" f:, a ST < $ '�' '' ST ,l ! 152 a + �i4�rj.d73,' ,'k 5t D N ��,��i ,ap"Tr�.}tS •+nj 51TH Si SM $T PL SM 4 PJ 3t $W .. 2 � s G J �' ' 1577M" ST SW rn �l}w`. .•.�'aY .*s AV 9 3 1 160TH P 160TH u`� w a ST SW.: y _ '�' 162 J g s� n 261ST Pl3Sb ( t 163RD ST SW --��' . PL &�va� �t n 163RD ? L SW 16TH PL = > > ae c� Ln 164 �441 •.� 111LGG] 3, t oil N W 114, S. 114, SECTION 5, TIYP 2t7JV, R. 4E., IY M EXIST, GtTY M.H. 5TUR A SEINER 25.00' w : tCO- 00 "t 0 z N 89'57'00" E 220.81' 0 1.34 EAST33.? rcft TOE OF SLOPE. ..� '. '• - 930 t EFh tPL ar.G 15r. ry Z —� g ►.�1� % 1--- SHOP \ ` N 89'S3'OQ" E a r,ax NeW rzoo mF AOD1T1vN 0 230.29' -nE NEW DN5PourS i 1F?2'�7[.taT1 1 1 t* NG iREmoJij, LLJ z St VJER W��"" I ,,-- �4tx7tnou Ir C. a: L" �t I J - o`- NEV PLAKIMIZ4 APPROX. LOCATI `( L9 + I — TE OF POWER LINE \ z -� (FIELD VERIFY) x 00 Cp OD x� Owi Sri ro "(0 GARAGE S, i : 4y., v it } _ 27,732 sq.ft. i _ .� - 0.64 acres m In"05;2$ w .,.'{". j JthDUi1c"iv ti.5't �/ ti�+t"G3s4T 0 rkt'oN , BSRL G 6.67' - .,-I- � ` ' - to "'-------._.. Tl N 89'S3'00" E J,31 ..{,'' . • STD,_ 10 8' - 117 73, - 10. QQ' 90 ' 94 ... _ .... FOUND PIPE (HELD AS S. LINE LOT 34 . • • . ' • PER NR. LOBOUDGER) . .SITE SECTION FOUND CONC. MONUMENT WITH "X" IN BRASS CAP IN CASE RMA 4561 SFR I FLOOR EL.=83.1't BENCHMARK CB RIM EL.=95,7' SITE -GRADING -DRAINAGE PLAN 111, Noat�1 ACCEPTABLE TIGHTLINE MATERIAL N-12 ADS Sch 40 PVC SDR 35 (ASTM D3034) EP GARAGE 39.49' FLOOR EL.=101.1'f wv FOUND CRIMPED IRON PIPE (HELD AS S.E. COR LOT 34) ,C 4" CONC. 6" PVC IE=93.9' IE=93.9' • ' ' 4" PVC 6" PVC IE=93.8' IE=93.7' 12" CONC. �( IE=93.6' �m Is SSM H RIM EL. = 76.3' A ► er Yq fY '� r GRAPHIC SCALE sa.r ( IN FEET ) 1 inch = 20 ft. LEGAL DESCRIPTION THE EAST ONE HALF OF TRACTS 33 AND 34, MEADOWDALE BEACH SUPPLEMENTAL PLAT, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 5 OF PLATS, PAGE 42, RECORDS OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY, OWNER BARBARA R. GLANTZ 15910 72ND AVE. W EDMONDS, Wk BASIS OF BEARING THE SOUTH LINE OF LOT 33, MEADOWDALE BEACH SUPPLEMENTAL PLAT. PER FOUND PIPES WAC 332-130-090 PROCEDURES USED IN THIS SURVEY WERE FIELD TRAVERSE, MEETING OR EXCEEDING STANDARDS SET BY WAC 332-130-090. WAC 332-130-100 INSTRUMENTATION FOR THIS SURVEY WAS A SOKKIA SET 3C 5 SECOND THEODOLITE. MONUMENTS LAST VISITED 11/1/96 LEGEND �= SET REBAR & CAP LS22688 o = FND. IRON PIPE 9= SET PK NAIL o = SET 2X2 HUB AND TACK P = POWER TV = TELEVISION TEL = TELEPHONE H2O = WATER SITE AREA: 54,37� S.F. TAX ACCOUNT NO. 5133-000-034-0108 ZONING = R/S 20 ST E: E;-= T , F I L E SURVEYORS NOTE: THE FOUND CRIMPED PIPE AT THE S.E. CORNER OF LOT 34 AND THE FOUND PIPE AT 105.28 WEST WERE HELD AS THE SOUTH LINE OF LOT 34. THIS BEING THE BEST EVIDENCE IN THE AREA AS TO THE TRUE ORIGINAL POSITION OF THE SAID DESCRIBED PROPERTY. BY OATH MR. LOBOUDGER OF 15920 72ND AVE. W., EDMONDS, WASHINGTON ( THE PROPERTY OWNER OF A PORTION OF LOT 35 TO THE SOUTH) REMEMBERS THE SURVEY CREW SETTING THESE POINTS PER A SURVEY BY M.B. MEYRING IN NOV. 1955 (FB 56). SAID OATH TAKEN 11 /17 /96. at �,•.JN C h �' G C 0 C E 0 0 E _ E A � © A .� tC� 00 UJ QD - - N _Z ►� '\ LC W 0 A Cl)> W 0) A � � v N F- � N t><1 AA Jos NO:000992 �S q/O 7Z ��